Assessing the effect of patient and prescriber preference in trials of treatment of depression in general practice
Andrew ThornettMed Sci Monit 2001; 7(5): RA1086-1091 :: ID: 509356
Abstract
Preferences include the choices made by individuals when presented with options for treatment for depression, and the system of beliefs and views that underlies those choices. They are informed by the experience of previous treatment by individuals, their family and friends, information from medical professionals and the media, and incorporates biases and ideologies present within the population. Although the randomised controlled trial is generally considered to be the optimal method for evaluating the effectiveness of health care interventions, [1] patients may become less motivated to follow the treatment protocol if they are not allocated to their preferred treatment. Consequently, the relevant arms of the study may appear less effective as a result. Further, following an invitation to join a clinical trial, patients may refuse randomisation and be excluded from the trial if they have strong treatment preferences, leading to the introduction of bias and restricted ability to generalise the results, as participants may not be representative. Considerable demand has been shown by patients for psychological treatments for the treatment of depression in primary care. However, two recent studies have not demonstrated a relationship between being allowed to choose treatment and short-term depression outcome. These two studies explored primary care patients treated with antidepressants or counselling, and non-directive counselling, cognitive-behaviour therapy or usual general practitioner care. Further work is needed to determine the effects of preferences within different study designs and to explore the views of both professionals and patients using appropriate qualitative designs.
Keywords: preference, primary care, Depression
Editorial
01 January 2026 : Editorial
Editorial: Increasing Awareness of Lung Cancer in Non-Smokers and Never-Smokers Challenges Current Approaches to Prevention and ScreeningDOI: 10.12659/MSM.952454
Med Sci Monit 2026; 32:e952454
In Press
Clinical Research
Institutional and Regional Variations in Access to Clinical Trials and Next-Generation Sequencing in Turkis...Med Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.951027
Clinical Research
Low-Intensity Blood Flow-Restricted Multi-Joint Exercise Improves Muscle Function in Patients With Patellof...Med Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.950516
Review article
Musculoskeletal Ultrasound and MRI in the Evaluation of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy: A ReviewMed Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.951283
Clinical Research
Sensory Processing, Dissociation, and Affective Symptoms in Misophonia: A Cross-Sectional Study of 35 AdultsMed Sci Monit In Press; DOI: 10.12659/MSM.950938
Most Viewed Current Articles
17 Jan 2024 : Review article 10,187,196
Vaccination Guidelines for Pregnant Women: Addressing COVID-19 and the Omicron VariantDOI :10.12659/MSM.942799
Med Sci Monit 2024; 30:e942799
13 Nov 2021 : Clinical Research 3,708,487
Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccination and Its Associated Factors Among Cancer Patients Attending the Oncology ...DOI :10.12659/MSM.932788
Med Sci Monit 2021; 27:e932788
14 Dec 2022 : Clinical Research 2,341,643
Prevalence and Variability of Allergen-Specific Immunoglobulin E in Patients with Elevated Tryptase LevelsDOI :10.12659/MSM.937990
Med Sci Monit 2022; 28:e937990
16 May 2023 : Clinical Research 706,524
Electrophysiological Testing for an Auditory Processing Disorder and Reading Performance in 54 School Stude...DOI :10.12659/MSM.940387
Med Sci Monit 2023; 29:e940387






