As you mentioned, they used response rates, not absolute changes in score per se. If it’s more likely that with the drug you end up getting >50% decrease on your Hamilton score it really doesn’t matter if on placebo there’s just simply more people that get for instance 48% or 49% decrease. So this methodology just fades out the fact that the decrease on Hamilton score compared to placebo is not clinically relevant and which I think more important, not patients own evaluation.
However, what I find more interesting is that the study revealed that there was usage of benzodiazepine in 36% of the clinical trials (for adverse reactions?) The researchers also mention: “We also observed that drugs tended to show a better efficacy profile when they were novel and used as experimental treatments than when they had become old.” That tells you something.
This was an excellent pick for an article, thank you.
As you mentioned, they used response rates, not absolute changes in score per se. If it’s more likely that with the drug you end up getting >50% decrease on your Hamilton score it really doesn’t matter if on placebo there’s just simply more people that get for instance 48% or 49% decrease. So this methodology just fades out the fact that the decrease on Hamilton score compared to placebo is not clinically relevant and which I think more important, not patients own evaluation.
However, what I find more interesting is that the study revealed that there was usage of benzodiazepine in 36% of the clinical trials (for adverse reactions?) The researchers also mention: “We also observed that drugs tended to show a better efficacy profile when they were novel and used as experimental treatments than when they had become old.” That tells you something.
This was an excellent pick for an article, thank you.