4.6 Article

The Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study (TADS): Outcomes Over 1 Year of Naturalistic Follow-Up

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
Volume 166, Issue 10, Pages 1141-1149

Publisher

AMER PSYCHIATRIC PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2009.08111620

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIMH [98-DS-0008]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study ( TADS) evaluates the effectiveness of fluoxetine, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and their combination in adolescents with major depressive disorder. The authors report effectiveness outcomes across a 1-year naturalistic follow-up period. Method: The randomized, controlled trial was conducted in 13 academic and community sites in the United States. Stages I, II, and III consisted of 12, 6, and 18 weeks of acute, consolidation, and continuation treatment, respectively. Following discontinuation of TADS treatments at the end of stage III, stage IV consisted of 1 year of naturalistic follow-up. The participants were 327 subjects between the ages of 12 and 17 with a primary DSM-IV diagnosis of major depressive disorder. No TADS treatment was provided during the follow-up period; treatment was available in the community. The primary dependent measures, rated by an independent evaluator blind to treatment status, were the total score on the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised and the rate of response, defined as a rating of much or very much improved on the Clinical Global Impressions improvement measure. Results: Sixty-six percent of the eligible subjects participated in at least one stage IV assessment. The benefits seen at the end of active treatment ( week 36) persisted during follow-up on all measures of depression and suicidality. Conclusions: In contrast to earlier reports on short-term treatments, in which worsening after treatment is the rule, the longer treatment in the TADS was associated with persistent benefits over 1 year of naturalistic follow-up.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available