PROTOCOL: Non‐pharmacological interventions for older people with a diagnosis of depression: An evidence and gap map

Shang, Wenru; Guo, Liping; Liu, Yujia; Li, Yanfei; Wei, Qian; Guo, Ke; Yang, Minyan; Wei, Lili; Xu, Zheng; Niu, Junqiang; Li, Xiuxia; Yang, Kehu

doi:10.1002/cl2.1354

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 125 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, pharmacological treatments should be combined with non-pharmacological interventions to maximize the effectiveness. This is in agreement with consistent evidence on the favorable effect of non-pharmacological interventions in support of pharmacological treatments in elderly depressed patients to improve the outcomes, to reduce the progression of cognitive deterioration, and also to reduce dosages of the drugs used, as well as to avoid multiple psychopharmacological combinations (with a heightened risk of side effects) [39][40][41]. Although antidepressants are essential for the treatment, most of the responders agreed that these drugs should be prescribed to older people following validated criteria to reduce over-prescription, side effects, and to optimize the effectiveness of treatment.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Ipsa Senectus Morbus Est? Approaching the Unmet Needs in Geriatric Depression: Results From a National Survey

Albert,

Tomasetti,

Antonelli Incalzi

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Depressive disorders represent the leading contributors to mental health-related global burden, and they are often diagnosed in the context of many comorbid disorders, such as cardiovascular disorders, Stroke, Parkinson’s Disease, Major Neurocognitive Disorders and Headache, thus worsening their outcomes. Depression is a challenge for “real-world” clinicians, due to the low rates of remission despite the increasing number of antidepressant strategies currently available. Indeed, current antidepressant strategies often fail to achieve acceptable rates of remission. One of the main challenges of “real-world” management of depression is represented by geriatric depression, which is common and under diagnosed. The challenge of diagnosis and treatment of geriatric depression in real world calls for the need of a deeper exploration of its management in clinical practice. This is the purpose of the present cross-sectional survey, aimed at evaluating the clinical approach to late-life depression in a sample of expert physicians working in geriatric settings in Italy, thus trying to provide useful insights on geriatric depression care.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Ipsa Senectus Morbus Est? Approaching the Unmet Needs in Geriatric Depression: Results From a National Survey

Albert,

Tomasetti,

Antonelli Incalzi

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers from China analyzed the publication characteristics of Campbell reviews in 2017. The study only described some basic characteristics including where the reviewers came from and what kind of software was used for data management and provided limited insight on other methodological characteristics (Shang et al, 2019). Schalken and Rietbergen (2017) analyzed systematic reviews on industrial and organizational psychology, where the Meta‐Analysis Reporting Standards (MARS) were used to assess reporting in the method section only.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The methodological and reporting characteristics of Campbell reviews: A systematic review

Wang

Welch

et al. 2021

Campbell Systematic Reviews

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The Campbell Collaboration undertakes systematic reviews of the effects of social and economic policies (interventions) to help policymakers, practitioners, and the public to make well‐informed decisions about policy interventions. In 2010, the Cochrane Collaboration and the Campbell Collaboration developed a voluntary co‐registration policy under the rationale to make full use of the shared interests and diverse expertise from different review groups within these two organizations. In order to promote the methodological quality and transparency of Campbell intervention reviews, the Methodological Expectations of Campbell Collaboration Intervention Reviews (MECCIR) were introduced in 2014 to guide Campbell reviewers. However, there has not been a comprehensive review of the methodological quality and reporting characteristics of Campbell reviews. Objectives This review aimed to assess the methodological and reporting characteristics of Campbell intervention reviews and to compare the methodological quality and reporting completeness of Campbell reviews published before and after the implementation of MECCIR. A secondary aim was to compare the methodological quality and reporting completeness of reviews registered with Campbell only versus those co‐registered with Cochrane and Campbell. Search Methods We searched the Campbell Library to identify all the completed intervention reviews published between 1 January 2011 to 31 January 2018. Selection Criteria One researcher downloaded and screened all the records to exclude non‐intervention reviews based on reviews’ title and abstract. A second researcher checked the full text of all the excluded records to confirm the exclusion. In case of discrepancies, the two researchers jointly agreed on the final decision. Data Collection and Analysis We developed the abstraction form based on mandatory reporting items for methods, results, and discussion from the MECCIR reporting standards Version 1.1; and additional epidemiological characteristics identified in a similar study of systematic reviews in health. Additionally, we judged the methodological quality and completeness of reporting of each included review. For methodological quality, we used the AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2) instrument; for reporting completeness we used the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses) checklist. We rated reporting as either complete/partial or not reported. We described characteristics of the included reviews with frequencies and percentages, and median with interquartile ranges (IQRs). We used Stata version 12.0 to conduct multiple linear regressions for continuous data and the ordered logistic regressions for ordered data to investigate associations between prespecified factors and both methodological quality and completeness of reporting. Main Results We included 96 Campbell reviews, 46 were published between January 2011 and September 2014 (pre‐MECCIR) and 50 between October 2014 and January 2018 (post...

show abstract

PROTOCOL: Non‐pharmacological interventions for older people with a diagnosis of depression: An evidence and gap map

Cited by 2 publications

References 125 publications

Ipsa Senectus Morbus Est? Approaching the Unmet Needs in Geriatric Depression: Results From a National Survey

Ipsa Senectus Morbus Est? Approaching the Unmet Needs in Geriatric Depression: Results From a National Survey

The methodological and reporting characteristics of Campbell reviews: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About