Protocol For a Scoping Review of Patient-Preferred Outcomes in Depressive Disorders
Boreham, M. A.; Bogdanova, M.; Bloomfield, M.; Cleare, A. J.; Strawbridge, R.
Show abstract
Depressive disorders remain a leading cause of health-related burden globally. Patients often suffer with symptoms throughout their lifetime, and rates of remission have been estimated to be as high as 66%. Clinicians typically favour the use of scales monitoring quantity and severity of depressive symptoms to evaluate response to treatment and determine whether patients have entered remission. However, given the complexity of the disorders and the subjective nature of mental health, research indicates that patients value outcomes beyond this narrow definition, identifying outcomes related to functioning and quality of life as important in addition to control of depressive symptoms. These studies are typically limited by relatively small sample sizes and associated lack of generalisability. Here, we outline the protocol for a scoping review that aims to comprehensively collect and review research into patient preferred outcomes in treatment and management of depressive disorders. Our review was designed in accordance with the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) statement. Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, and CINAHL will be searched for relevant records. Qualitative and mixed-methods studies will be included, and all data will be synthesised and presented in narrative form. We anticipate that our results will provide useful insight for clinicians when caring for patients with depressive disorders and highlight potential misalignment between patient and clinician treatment goals.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical Presentation of Psychotic Experiences in Patients with Common Mental Disorders Attending the UK Primary Care Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) Programme 93%
- Exploring the Efficacy and Potential of Large Language Models for Depression: A Systematic Review 93%
- ADHD in adults with recurrent depression 92%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Individual participant data systematic reviews with meta-analyses of psychotherapies for borderline personality disorder: A protocol 95%
- While they wait: A cross-sectional survey on wait times for mental health treatment for anxiety and depression for Australian adolescents 93%
- Side effect profile and comparative tolerability of newer generation antidepressants in the acute treatment of major depressive disorder in children and adolescents: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Single-session intervention with and without video support to prevent the worsening of emotional distress among healthcare workers during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: a randomized clinical trial 93%
- The development and validation of a prognostic model to predict relapse in adults with remitted depression in primary care: secondary analysis of pooled individual participant data from multiple studies 93%
- Quantifying Care, Qualifying Experiences: A Systematic Review of Measurement-Based Care in Psychiatry from Patient and Provider Perspectives 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Interventions Promoting Recovery from Depression for Patients Transitioning from Outpatient Mental Health Services to Primary Care: Protocol for a Scoping Review 96%
- Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Treatment-Resistant Depression: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis 96%
- Systematic Review Protocol: The Effects of Theory-Based Interventions for Self-Help Practices in the Management of Mild to Moderate Depression 96%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.