| Title |
Profile of vortioxetine in the treatment of major depressive disorder: an overview of the primary and secondary literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/tcrm.s55313 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marc Kelliny, Paul E Croarkin, Katherine M Moore, William V Bobo |
| Abstract |
This article reviews the pharmacological profile and available efficacy and tolerability/safety data for vortioxetine, one of the most recent antidepressant drugs to be approved in the USA for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults. The efficacy of vortioxetine for treating MDD in adults is supported by eight positive short-term (6- to 12-weeks) randomized, placebo-controlled trials, and one positive randomized, double-blind, 52-week relapse prevention trial. Based on pooled data from short-term randomized trials and from longer-term studies, vortioxetine appears to be well tolerated and to have a low incidence of adverse effects on sexual functioning. Vortioxetine also appears to be effective for treating symptoms of MDD in the elderly based on the results of one randomized trial for which recruitment was focused on this specific population. Nevertheless, effectiveness studies that directly compare the clinical effects of vortioxetine with other established antidepressant drugs are lacking, and there is no evidence as yet that vortioxetine is more clinically effective than other types of antidepressants. Some preliminary suggestions concerning the place of vortioxetine among the broad range of pharmacological treatments for adults with MDD are provided. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 87 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 16% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 25 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 25% |
| Psychology | 9 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 11% |
| Unknown | 29 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 21 February 2021.
All research outputs
#7,047,002
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#346
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,425
of 276,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#11
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 276,419 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 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 73% of its contemporaries.