Doctors have difficulty selecting medications for people who don’t get it. Things get mixed up. Severity of symptoms and gender are characteristics that contribute to conflict of interest at the doctor. So it’s important to get things right with a written prescription, that’s what this latest report with meta-analysis was all about.
A systematic review and network-analysis was implemented to look into affairs at Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Embase, LILACS, database, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, PsycINFO, the websites of regulatory agencies, and international registers for published and unpublished, double-blind, randomized control trials from their inception to Jan 8, 2016, in order to say whether or not antidepressants work.
The report was lengthy but accurate, people fight depression all of the time. Low levels of serotonin are thought to effect mood swings in a negative way and the patient struggles to get the treatment he needs. This has been the case for awhile, and this report got to some findings to ensure quality of care.
Researchers at the University of Oxford shared their perspective with the NHS UK press, saying “This study is the final answer to a long-standing controversy about whether anti-depressants work for depression. We found the most commonly prescribed anti-depressants work for moderate to severe depression and I think this is very good news for patients and clinicians”.
Inadequate resources lead to misuse. Structural meta-data clarifying benefits ensure patients get what they need. When symptoms persists its tough switching medications, so it’s important for the patient to consider patient demographics that weren’t included in this study, such as: age, gender, and meta-analysis not covering long term-use. This way an unhealthy treatment plan doesn’t become part of the patient’s grief.
2018, Feb 22. Retrieved from URL: http://www.bbc.com/news/health-43143889.