Skip to main content
×
×
Home

High heterogeneity and low reliability in the diagnosis of major depression will impair the development of new drugs

  • Samuel M. Lieblich (a1), David J. Castle (a2), Christos Pantelis (a3), Malcolm Hopwood (a4), Allan Hunter Young (a5) and Ian P. Everall (a1)...
Summary

Major depressive disorder is a common diagnosis associated with a high burden of disease that has proven to be highly heterogeneous and unreliable. Treatments currently available demonstrate limited efficacy and effectiveness. New drug development is urgently required but is likely to be hindered by diagnostic limitations.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      High heterogeneity and low reliability in the diagnosis of major depression will impair the development of new drugs
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      High heterogeneity and low reliability in the diagnosis of major depression will impair the development of new drugs
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      High heterogeneity and low reliability in the diagnosis of major depression will impair the development of new drugs
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Non-Commercial, No Derivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Corresponding author
Samuel M. Lieblich, Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Level: 01 Room: N10023, Main Block, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia. Email: samuel.lieblich@unimelb.edu.au
Footnotes
Hide All

Declarations of interest

D.J.C. has received grants and personal fees from Eli Lilly, Janssen-Cilag, Roche, Allergen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Lundbeck, AstraZeneca, Hospira, Organon, Sanofi-Aventis, and Wyeth during the writing of this review. C.P. has received grant support from Janssen-Cilag, Eli Lilly, Hospira (Mayne), AstraZeneca, and received honoraria for consultancy to Janssen-Cilag, Eli Lilly, Hospira (Mayne), AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Schering Plough, and Lundbeck. Over the past 2 years he has participated on advisory boards for Janssen-Cilag and Lundbeck, and received honoraria for talks presented at educational meetings organised by AstraZeneca, Janssen-Cilag and Lundbeck. M.H. has received personal fees or grants from Lundbeck, AstraZeneca and Servier during the writing of this review. A.H.Y. reports personal fees from Lundbeck, Sunovion, AstraZeneca and Janssen outside the submitted work. I.P.E. has received personal fees or grants from Lundbeck, AstraZeneca, and Abbvie during the writing of this review.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
1 Murray, CJ, Vos, T, Lozano, R, Naghavi, M, Flaxman, AD, Michaud, C, et al. Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 291 diseases and injuries in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012; 380: 2197–223.
2 Regier, DA, Narrow, WE, Clarke, DE, Kraemer, HC, Kuramoto, SJ, Kuhl, EA, et al. DSM-5 field trials in the United States and Canada, Part II: test-retest reliability of selected categorical diagnoses. Am J Psychiatry 2013; 170:5970.
3 McHugh, M. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med 2012; 22: 276–82.
4 Kessler, RC, Berglund, P, Demler, O, Jin, R, Koretz, D, Merikangas, KR, et al. The epidemiology of major depressive disorder: results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R). JAMA 2003; 289: 3095–105.
5 Pigott, HE, Leventhal, AM, Alter, GS, Boren, JJ. Efficacy and effectiveness of antidepressants: current status of research. Psychother Psychosom 2010; 79: 267–79.
6 Spitzer, RL, Fleiss, JL. A re-analysis of the reliability of psychiatric diagnosis. Br J Psychiatry 1974; 125: 341–7.
7 Williams, JBW, Gibbon, M, First, MB, Spitzer, RL, Davies, M, Borus, J, et al. The structured clinical interview for DSM-III-R (SCID) reliability description of sites. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1992; 49: 630–6.
8 Brown, TA, Di Nardo, PA, Lehman, CL, Campbell, LA. Reliability of DSM-IV anxiety and mood disorders: implications for the classification of emotional disorders. J Abnorm Psychol 2001; 110:4958.
9 Spitzer, RL, Forman, JB, Nee, J. DSM-III field trials: I. Initial interrater diagnostic reliability. Am J Psychiatry 1979; 136: 815–7.
10 Kirsch, I, Deacon, BJ, Huedo-Medina, TB, Scoboria, A, Moore, TJ, Johnson, BT. Initial severity and antidepressant benefits: a meta-analysis of data submitted to the Food and Drug Administration. PLoS Med 2008; 5: e45.
11 Carroll, BJ. Bringing back melancholia. Bipolar Disord 2012; 14: 15.
12 Corruble, E, Falissard, B, Gorwood, P. Is DSM-IV bereavement exclusion for major depression relevant to treatment response? A case-control, prospective study. J Clin Psychiatry 2011; 72: 898902.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

BJPsych Open
  • ISSN: -
  • EISSN: 2056-4724
  • URL: /core/journals/bjpsych-open
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 22
Total number of PDF views: 55 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 153 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd January 2018 - 17th July 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

High heterogeneity and low reliability in the diagnosis of major depression will impair the development of new drugs

  • Samuel M. Lieblich (a1), David J. Castle (a2), Christos Pantelis (a3), Malcolm Hopwood (a4), Allan Hunter Young (a5) and Ian P. Everall (a1)...
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *