. 2014 Apr 3;2014(4):CD006531. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006531.pub2

038.

Methods	A double‐bind, parallel group, active controlled, double‐dummy, randomised study.
Participants	Participants suffering from either reactive or endogenous unipolar depression considered suitable for treatment with "tricyclic‐like" antidepressants were eligible for the study. Participants had to score al least 17 on the first 17‐itemof the Hamilton rating scale for depression (HDRS‐21) and fulfil the DSM‐III criteria for the diagnosis of depression. Subjects were excluded in they were suffering from severe co‐existing diseases, intolerant to "tricyclic‐like" drugs, scored 4 on the suicide item of the HDRS‐21, had received ECT in the previous 3 months required hospitalisation for ECT treatment, had taken IMAO with 2 weeks of the active phase of the study and female participants who were pregnant or lactating. Age range: 18‐70 years old.
Interventions	Paroxetine: 30 participants. Mianserin: 29 participants. Paroxetine dose range: 15‐30 mg/day Mianserine dose range: 30‐90 mg/day.
Outcomes	HDRS‐21, Clinical Global Impression (CGI). Total dropout, dropout due to side effects, dropout due to inefficacy. Number of patients experiencing at least one side effect, side‐effect profile.
Notes	None.
*Risk of bias*
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "subjects were randomized (...) allocation of treatment by random code".
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information provided.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)   All outcomes	Unclear risk	Quote: "double blind, using a double dummy technique". No further details.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)   All outcomes	Unclear risk	Quote: "double blind, using a double dummy technique". No further details.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)   All outcomes	Unclear risk	Quote: "results are presented for the Intention‐to‐treat (ITT) population, extender data set". Less than 20% of participants in each study arm abandoned the study prematurely.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Outcomes data were reported.
Other bias	Unclear risk	Sponsorship bias cannot be ruled out.