Sensitivity of the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale to response and its consequences for the assessment of efficacy

Journal of Psychiatric Research

Volumn 43, Issue 12, 2009, Pages 1049-1056

  Santen, Gijs ^a   Danhof, Meindert ^a   Pasqua, Oscar Della ^a,b  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b GLAXOSMITHKLINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Antidepressants; Clinical trials; Depression; Endpoint sensitivity; HAMD; MADRS

Indexed keywords

ANTIDEPRESSANT AGENT; IMIPRAMINE; PAROXETINE; PLACEBO;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CLINICAL TRIAL; HAMILTON SCALE; HUMAN; MAJOR DEPRESSION; MONTGOMERY ASBERG DEPRESSION RATING SCALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SYMPTOM; TREATMENT DURATION;

ANTIDEPRESSIVE AGENTS, SECOND-GENERATION; DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; DEPRESSIVE DISORDER; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; DRUG ADMINISTRATION SCHEDULE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PAROXETINE; PSYCHIATRIC STATUS RATING SCALES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 67650739258     PISSN: 00223956     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2009.02.001     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Ballesteros J., Bobes J., Bulbena A., Luque A., Dal Re R., Ibarra N., et al. Sensitivity to change, discriminative performance, and cutoff criteria to define remission for embedded short scales of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD). Journal of Affective Disorders 102 (2007) 93-99
2. Bech P., and Rafaelsen O. The use of rating scales exemplified by a comparison of the Hamilton and Bech-Rafaelsen Melancholia Scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 62 (1980) 128-131
3. Bech P., Allerup P., Gram L.F., Reisby N., Rosenberg R., Jacobsen O., et al. The Hamilton Depression Scale. Evaluation of objectivity using logistic models. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 63 (1980) 290-299
4. Bermejo P.E., Ruiz-Huete C., and Terron C. Relationship between essential tremor, Parkinson's disease and dementia with Lewy bodies. Revista de Neurologica 45 (2007) 689-694
5. Carmody T.J., Rush A.J., Bernstein I., Warden D., Brannan S., Burnham D., et al. The Montgomery Asberg and the Hamilton ratings of depression: a comparison of measures. European Neuropsychopharmacology 16 (2006) 601-611
6. Dunner D.L., and Dunbar G.C. Optimal dose regimen for paroxetine. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 53 Suppl. (1992) 21-26
7. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ. An introduction to the bootstrap. Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability, vol. 57. California, USA: Chapman and Hall, CRC Press; 1993.
8. Faries D., Herrera J., Rayamajhi J., DeBrota D., Demitrack M., and Potter W.Z. The responsiveness of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Journal of Psychiatric Research 34 (2000) 3-10
9. Feighner J.P., Cohn J.B., Fabre L.F., Fieve R.R., Mendels J., Shrivastava R.K., et al. A study comparing paroxetine placebo and imipramine in depressed patients. Journal of Affective Disorders 28 (1993) 71-79
10. Hamilton M. A rating scale for depression. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 23 (1960) 56-62
11. Hamilton M. Development of a rating scale for primary depressive illness. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 6 (1967) 278-296
12. Jonsson EN. Graphical display of population data. ; 2004. p. 13 [Abstr 522].
13. Khan A., Brodhead A.E., and Kolts R.L. Relative sensitivity of the Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Clinical Global Impressions rating scale in antidepressant clinical trials: a replication analysis. International Clinical Psychopharmacology 19 (2004) 157-160
14. Khan A., Khan S.R., Shankles E.B., and Polissar N.L. Relative sensitivity of the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Clinical Global Impressions rating scale in antidepressant clinical trials. International Clinical Psychopharmacology 17 (2002) 281-285
15. Khan A., Leventhal R.M., Khan S.R., and Brown W.A. Severity of depression and response to antidepressants and placebo: an analysis of the Food and Drug Administration database. Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology 22 (2002) 40-45
16. Lane P. Handling drop-out in longitudinal clinical trials: a comparison of the LOCF and MMRM approaches. Pharmaceutical Statistics (2007)
17. Maier W., and Philipp M. Comparative analysis of observer depression scales. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 72 (1985) 239-245
18. Mallinckrodt C.H. The test of public scrutiny. Pharmaceutical Statistics 5 (2006) 249-252
19. Mallinckrodt C.H., Clark W.S., and David S.R. Accounting for dropout bias using mixed-effects models. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 11 (2001) 9-21
20. Mallinckrodt C.H., Kaiser C.J., Watkin J.G., Molenberghs G., and Carroll R.J. The effect of correlation structure on treatment contrasts estimated from incomplete clinical trial data with likelihood-based repeated measures compared with last observation carried forward ANOVA. Clinical Trials 1 (2004) 477-489
21. Mallinckrodt C.H., Watkin J.G., Molenberghs G., and Carroll R.J. Choice of the primary analysis in longitudinal clinical trials. Pharmaceutical Statistics 3 (2004) 161-169
22. 7 scale. Canadian Medical Association Journal 173 (2005) 1327-1334
23. Moller H.J. Methodological aspects in the assessment of severity of depression by the Hamilton Depression Scale. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience 251 Suppl. 2 (2001) II13-II20
24. Montgomery S.A., and Asberg M. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. British Journal of Psychiatry 134 (1979) 382-389
25. Mulder R.T., Joyce P.R., and Frampton C. Relationships among measures of treatment outcome in depressed patients. Journal of Affective Disorders 76 (2003) 127-135
26. O'Sullivan R.L., Fava M., Agustin C., Baer L., and Rosenbaum J.F. Sensitivity of the six-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 95 (1997) 379-384
27. R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. 2007. Vienna, Austria, R Foundation for Statistical Computing. .
28. Santen G., Gomeni R., Danhof M., and Della Pasqua O. Sensitivity of the individual items of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale to response and its consequences for the assessment of efficacy. Journal of Psychiatric Research 42 (2008) 1000-1009
29. Trosch R.M. Neuroleptic-induced movement disorders: deconstructing extrapyramidal symptoms. Journal of American Geriatric Society 52 (2004) S266-S271
30. Tuk B., Oberye J.J., Pieters M.S., Schoemaker R.C., Kemp B., van Gerven J., et al. Pharmacodynamics of temazepam in primary insomnia: assessment of the value of quantitative electroencephalography and saccadic eye movements in predicting improvement of sleep. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 62 (1997) 444-452
31. van der Heijde D.M., van 't H.M., van Riel P.L., and van de Putte L.B. Development of a disease activity score based on judgment in clinical practice by rheumatologists. Journal of Rheumatology 20 (1993) 579-581