Skip to main content

Free Content STAR*D: A Tale and Trail of Bias

Download Article:
 Download
(PDF 768.3 kb)
 
The 35-million-dollar Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study is the largest antidepressant effectiveness study ever conducted. STAR*D enrolled 4,041 depressed patients and provided them with exemplary free acute and continuing antidepressant care to maximize their likelihood of achieving and maintaining remission. Patients who failed to get adequate relief from their first antidepressant were provided with up to three additional trials of pharmacologically distinct treatments. This article identifies numerous instances of apparent bias in the conduct and reporting of outcomes from this study. In contrast to STAR*D's report of positive findings supporting antidepressants' effectiveness, only 108 of its 4,041 patients (2.7%) had an acute-care remission, and during the 12 months of continuing care, these patients neither relapsed nor dropped out. This article also discusses the roles of the American Journal of Psychiatry (AJP) and the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) in promoting the biased reporting of STAR*D's results.

40 References.

No Supplementary Data.
No Article Media
No Metrics

Keywords: ANTIDEPRESSANTS; MAJOR DEPRESSION; RESEARCHER BIAS; STAR*D

Document Type: Research Article

Publication date: 01 April 2011

More about this publication?
  • Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry is no longer available to subscribers on Ingenta Connect. Please go to http://connect.springerpub.com/content/sgrehpp to access your online subscription to Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry.
  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
X
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more