Methods | 5 week randomised study | |
Participants | Diagnosis: DSM-IV major depressive episode (bipolar disorder not included) Setting: Psychiatric inpatients |
|
Interventions | 1. Mirtazapine: 45 mg/day, N = 20 2. Reboxetine: 8 mg/day, N = 20 Fixed dosing scheduling |
|
Outcomes | The measure used for response and remission in the review: 21-item HAM-D Other measures: Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical axis activity |
|
Notes | ||
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors’ judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Quote: “randomised” Comment: No further information provided. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Comment: The method of allocation is not described. |
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes |
High risk | Quote: “We abstained from blinding the medication because the side effect profiles of reboxetine and mirtazapine markedly differ" |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes |
Low risk | Less than 20% of the participants dropped out and missing outcome data are balanced in numbers across intervention groups, with similar reasons of missing data across groups |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | The response outcome at the end of acute-phase treatment is provided as the numbers of the participants who achieved this |
Free of Sponsorship bias? | High risk | The funding source is the pharmaceutical company of mir-tazapine |