↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Efficacy and safety of olanzapine/fluoxetine combination in the treatment of treatment-resistant depression: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
Efficacy and safety of olanzapine/fluoxetine combination in the treatment of treatment-resistant depression: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, February 2017
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s127453
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shuxin Luan, Hongquan Wan, Shijun Wang, He Li, Baogang Zhang

Abstract

Whether olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC) is superior to olanzapine or fluoxetine monotherapy in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) remains controversial. Thus, we conducted this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the efficacy and safety of OFC with olanzapine or fluoxetine monotherapy for patients with TRD. RCTs published in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry were systematically reviewed to assess the efficacy and safety of OFC. Outcomes included mean changes from baseline in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S), Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A), Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) scores, response rate, remission rate, and adverse events. Results were expressed with weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and risk ratio (RR) with 95% CIs. A total of five RCTs with 3,020 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with olanzapine or fluoxetine monotherapy, OFC was associated with greater changes from baseline in MADRS (WMD =-3.37, 95% CI: -4.76, -1.99; P<0.001), HAM-A (WMD =-1.82, 95% CI: -2.25, -1.40; P<0.001), CGI-S (WMD =-0.37, 95% CI: -0.45, -0.28; P<0.001), and BPRS scores (WMD =-1.46, 95% CI: -2.16, -0.76; P<0.001). Moreover, OFC had significantly higher response rate (RR =1.35, 95% CI: 1.12, 1.63; P=0.001) and remission rate (RR =1.71, 95% CI: 1.31, 2.23; P<0.001). The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was similar between the OFC and monotherapy groups (RR =1.01, 95% CI: 0.94, 1.08; P=0.834). OFC is more effective than olanzapine or fluoxetine monotherapy in the treatment of patients with TRD. Our results provided supporting evidence for the use of OFC in TRD. However, considering the limitations in this study, more large-scale, well-designed RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 25%
Student > Postgraduate 3 13%
Researcher 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 4%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 6 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 33%
Neuroscience 4 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 6 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 March 2017.
All research outputs
#6,722,972
of 12,517,383 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#872
of 2,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,498
of 250,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#35
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,517,383 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,120 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 250,908 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.