Article Text

PDF
Meta-analysis
GPs good at ruling out depression in primary care, but false positives common
  1. Sharone Abramowitz1,
  2. Chizobam Ani2
  1. 1Alameda County Medical Center, Oakland, California, USA
  2. 2Charles Drew University of Medicine and Science, Lynwood, California, USA
  1. Correspondence to Sharone Abramowitz
    Primary Care Medicine, Alameda County Medical Center, 1411 East 31st Street, Oakland, CA 94602, USA; sabramowitz{at}acmedctr.org

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Commentary on: OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science

Major depression disorder (MDD) causes psychosocial morbidity and complicates clinical outcomes of co-morbid medical conditions.1,,5 Many depressed individuals rely on primary care, and evidence suggests more needs to be done to improve case-finding errors in primary care settings.6,,12 Efforts to improve depression screening have shown mixed results, highlighting the need for focused interventions aimed at improving physician management of depression.13 Mitchell and colleagues’ meta-analysis14 of unassisted diagnoses of depression may be the only comprehensive meta-analysis on the subject published and presents a clinical practice review that is subject to controversial interpretation. We expect their findings to stir debate regarding the quality of depression diagnosis in primary care. It is comforting that their …

View Full Text

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.