Treatment validity of different diagnostic concepts of depression.
This study evaluated the comparative treatment validity of four different but overlapping sets of criteria for the diagnosis of depression: the St. Louis, New York, Texas Actuarial, and Composite criteria. Results revealed that none of the criteria offered predictive strength or demonstrated particular advantages over the others. Patients excluded by each of the various criteria tended to do as well as those included; a small percentage of patients included by each of the criteria were nonresponders to drug therapy. Once a clinical and psychometric diagnosis was established, then no additional (short-term) prognostic information was gained by further scrutiny with the various research diagnostic criteria examined.
D000328:Adult; D000639:Amitriptyline / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D000657:Amoxapine / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic; D003866:Depressive Disorder / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000188:drug therapy; D003989:Dibenzoxazepines / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011379:Prognosis
D003989:Dibenzoxazepines; D000639:Amitriptyline; D000657:Amoxapine