...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of psychiatric research >Magnitude of placebo response and response variance in antidepressant clinical trials using structured, taped and appraised rater interviews compared to traditional rating interviews
【24h】

Magnitude of placebo response and response variance in antidepressant clinical trials using structured, taped and appraised rater interviews compared to traditional rating interviews

机译:与传统评分访谈相比,使用结构化,录音和评估式访谈进行的抗抑郁药临床试验中安慰剂反应的幅度和反应方差

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The high failure rate of antidepressant clinical trials is due in part to a high magnitude of placebo response and considerable variance in placebo response. In some recent trials enhanced patient interview techniques consisting of Structured Interview Guide for the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (SIGMA) interviews, audiotaping of patient interviews and 'central' appraisal with Rater Applied Performance Scale (RAPS) criteria have been implemented in the hope of increasing reliability and thus reducing the placebo response. However, the data supporting this rationale for a change in patient interview technique are sparse.We analyzed data from depressed patients assigned to placebo in antidepressant clinical trials conducted at a single research site between 2008 and 2012. Three trials included 34 depressed patients undergoing SIGMA depression interviews with taping and RAPS appraisal and 4 trials included 128 depressed patients using traditional interview methods.Using patient level data we assessed the mean decrease in total MADRS scores and the variability of the decrease in MADRS scores in trials using SIGMA interviews versus trials using traditional interviews.Mean decrease in total MADRS score was significantly higher in the 3 trials that used SIGMA interviews compared to the 4 trials using traditional interviews (M=13.0 versus 8.3, t(df=160)=2.04, p=0.047). Furthermore, trials using SIGMA had a larger magnitude of response variance based on Levene's test for equality of variance (SD=12.3 versus 9.4, F=7.3, p=0.008).The results of our study suggest that enhanced patient interview techniques such as SIGMA interviews, audiotaping and RAPS appraisal may not result in the intended effect of reducing the magnitude of placebo response and placebo variance.
机译:抗抑郁药临床试验的高失败率部分归因于安慰剂反应的高幅度和安慰剂反应的显着差异。在最近的一些试验中,已实施了增强的患者访谈技术,包括蒙哥马利-阿斯伯格抑郁量表(SIGMA)的结构化访谈指南,患者访谈的录音和评估者应用绩效量表(RAPS)标准的“中央”评估,以期达到希望可靠性的提高,从而降低了安慰剂的反应。但是,支持这种改变患者访谈技术原理的数据很少。我们分析了在2008年至2012年期间通过单一研究地点进行的抗抑郁药临床试验中分配给安慰剂的抑郁症患者的数据。三项试验包括34名接受SIGMA抑郁症的抑郁症患者进行录音和RAPS评估的访谈以及4项试验采用传统的访谈方法对128名抑郁症患者进行了评估。通过使用患者水平数据,我们评估了SIGMA访谈相对于传统访谈的平均MADRS得分的平均下降以及MADRS得分下降的变化性在使用SIGMA访谈的3项试验中,与通过传统访谈进行的4项试验相比,MADRS总得分的平均降低幅度明显更高(M = 13.0对8.3,t(df = 160)= 2.04,p = 0.047)。此外,基于Levene方差均等检验,使用SIGMA的试验的反应方差幅度更大(SD = 12.3与9.4,F = 7.3,p = 0.008)。我们的研究结果表明,诸如SIGMA之类的增强的患者访谈技术访谈,录音和RAPS评估可能无法达到降低安慰剂反应幅度和安慰剂方差的预期效果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号