New Study Tells Us Which Antidepressants Work the Best

Here’s some news for all my fellow depressives. Aaron Carroll points today to a massive new study on the effectiveness of antidepressants:

The reassuring news is that all of the antidepressants were more effective than placebos….Further good news is that smaller trials did not have substantially different results from larger trials….It also did not appear that industry sponsoring of trials correlated with significant differences in response or dropout rates.

….The bad news is that even though there were statistically significant differences, the effect sizes were still mostly modest. The benefits also applied only to people who were suffering from major depression, specifically in the short term. In other words, this study provides evidence that when people are found to have acute major depression, treatment with antidepressants works to improve outcomes in the first two months of therapy.

Just to clarify this, this was a metastudy focused solely on studies of antidepressants for major depression. It didn’t conclude anything one way or the other about how well these drugs work for those with moderate depression. Also, they warn that Prozac is probably the only antidepressant that works for children and teenagers.

And now it’s time for the payoff to my clickbait headline. How does your antidepressant perform? Here’s the chart:

The left chart shows how well each antidepressant worked. The right chart shows how well people tolerated it. For example, I use venlafaxine (Effexor), which appears to be pretty effective (odds ratio = 1.78). Its tolerability, as measured by how many people dropped out of studies, is about the same as a placebo.

As always, this is just raw data. Different drugs work differently for different people. Only you and your doctor can decide for sure what works best for you.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate