Submited on: 17 Nov 2010 08:57:47 AM GMT
Published on: 17 Nov 2010 07:11:57 PM GMT
 
Comments and suggestions
Posted by Mr. Torbjorn Wisloff on 22 Mar 2011 02:12:27 PM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Partly
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? Yes
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    2.

    -Escitalopram is not studied, and should not be mentioned in the conclusion

    -The authors state in the results that “Studies with citalopram with an average dose above 45 mg per day clearly show that the antidepressant effect of citalopram is similar to other antidepressant drugs (Illustration 2).” This interpretation of Illustration 2 is imprecise. The mentioned meta-analysis is inconclusive.

    -In the discussion, the authors refer to a study by Montgomery et.al. In the second paragraph, it is stated that in this study “only 40 mg was effective”. This statement corresponds to the results in that study. In the fifth paragraph, however, the authors claim that this study “showing no effect of 20 mg citalopram”. In the study the phrase is; “no statistically significant difference between the citalopram 20 mg group and placebo”. This is not in correspondence with each other, because “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” (Ref: Altman BMJ 1995).

    5.

    -The article raises some very interesting issues, but it lacks focus. The authors should ask themselves what is really their research question. E.g. The last two sentences of the background should be a separate paragraph, and the beginning of the discussion should be better in correspondence with this.

    -Parts of the Methods section seems to be results.

    6.

    -In the meta-regression, the authors assume a linear relationship. It would be interesting to see whether other assumptions lead to different results.

    -In the sixth paragraph in the discussion, three other trials comparing citalopram and placebo are mentioned. It would be interesting to see the impact of these studies on the meta-analysis.

    7.

    -The last sentence of the fifth paragraph in the discussion should be deleted. If an average effect is considered statistically significant, its size is not relevant by itself. A similar comment is written in the sixth paragraph; “a difference of 1.5 points must be regarded as not clinically useful”. This is also an average and hence, the comment is unnecessary and inappropriate.

    -The introduction of d-citalopram and s-citalopram in the discussion lacks some introduction to these terms or should be deleted.

     

    Misprints:

    -A minus is missing in a confidence interval in the abstract. According to illustration 2, this should have been (-0.87 to -0.21)

    -At the end of the second paragraph in the methods section, it says “depression sale”. I guess this should be “depression scale”

    -In the methods section, it is stated that they performed 2 meta-analyses, but in Illustration 2, there seems to be 3, and according to the results, there were another 3 meta-analyses with ITT data

    -In the third paragraph under results, the authors report a confidence interval of (-1.2 to 0.21) around an estimate of -0.68. This confidence interval is not symmetric around the estimate in contrary to the other confidence intervals. This should be checked.

    -The email address to the last author lacks an “e”.

     

  • Competing interests:
    One of the authors is my boss
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I have been involved in numerous systematic reviews and performed several meta-analyses, some of these have been in fielads related to this article

  • How to cite:  Wisloff T .Comments and suggestions[Review of the article 'Are Regular Doses Of Citalopram For Depression Only Placebos? Meta-analysis And Meta-regression Analysis Of Pre-registration Clinical Trial Data ' by Klemp M].WebmedCentral 2011;2(3):WMCRW00613
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? Yes
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    The aim and research question could be clrearer.

  • Competing interests:
    No competing interests
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Several years of experience with systematic reviews and meta analyses of efficacy studies within the mental health field.

  • How to cite:  Kornor H .Review of Are Regular Doses Of Citalopram For Depression Only Placebos? Meta-analysis And Meta-regression Analysis Of Pre-registration Clinical Trial Data [Review of the article 'Are Regular Doses Of Citalopram For Depression Only Placebos? Meta-analysis And Meta-regression Analysis Of Pre-registration Clinical Trial Data ' by Klemp M].WebmedCentral 2011;2(1):WMCRW00384
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Some minor corrections
Posted by Prof. Bent Natvig on 19 Nov 2010 08:45:43 PM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? No
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:
    Just some minor corrections:
    
    Page 2  left column, line 5 from below  and
    
    Page 4  left column, line 18 from below
    
         P=0.65 (See Table 1)
     Page 3 left column, line 20 from below "depression scale"
    Page 3 right column, line 3 from below  "... of citalopram at endpoint..."
    Page 5 right column, line 3 from below  "."
    
    

     

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    Yes
  • References:
    One key reference is: Aursnes I, Tvete IF, Gaasemyr J, Natvig B: Suicide attempts in clinical trials with paroxetine randomised against placebo. BMC Medicine 2005; 3:14.
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I have published several papers in this area.

  • How to cite:  Natvig B .Some minor corrections[Review of the article 'Are Regular Doses Of Citalopram For Depression Only Placebos? Meta-analysis And Meta-regression Analysis Of Pre-registration Clinical Trial Data ' by Klemp M].WebmedCentral 2011;1(11):WMCRW00152
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse