These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34153631)

  • 1. Rating, berating or overrating antidepressant efficacy? The case of the Hamilton depression rating scale.
    Hieronymus F; Østergaard SD
    Eur Neuropsychopharmacol; 2021 Nov; 52():12-14. PubMed ID: 34153631
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Not as golden as standards should be: interpretation of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression.
    Kriston L; von Wolff A
    J Affect Disord; 2011 Jan; 128(1-2):175-7. PubMed ID: 20696481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Antidepressants, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale Conundrum, and Quality of Life.
    Pies RW
    J Clin Psychopharmacol; 2020; 40(4):339-341. PubMed ID: 32644322
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The Inventory Of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-C(28)) is more sensitive to changes in depressive symptomatology than the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD(17)) in patients with mild major, minor or subsyndromal depression.
    Helmreich I; Wagner S; Mergl R; Allgaier AK; Hautzinger M; Henkel V; Hegerl U; Tadić A
    Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci; 2011 Aug; 261(5):357-67. PubMed ID: 21132437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Commentary on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression: 60+ Years Old and Still Relevant to the Assessment of Antidepressant Treatment Outcomes.
    Thase ME
    Psychopharmacol Bull; 2022 May; 52(2):154-156. PubMed ID: 35721815
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The Hamilton Rating Scale for depression: a factor analysis.
    Mowbray RM
    Psychol Med; 1972 Aug; 2(3):272-80. PubMed ID: 5079190
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Assessing remission in major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder clinical trials with the discan metric of the Sheehan disability scale.
    Sheehan DV; Harnett-Sheehan K; Spann ME; Thompson HF; Prakash A
    Int Clin Psychopharmacol; 2011 Mar; 26(2):75-83. PubMed ID: 21102344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D) and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Scale (MADRS). A psychometric re-analysis of the European genome-based therapeutic drugs for depression study using Rasch analysis.
    Bech P; Allerup P; Larsen ER; Csillag C; Licht RW
    Psychiatry Res; 2014 Jul; 217(3):226-32. PubMed ID: 24746391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The clinical significance of antidepressant treatment effects cannot be derived from placebo-verum response differences.
    Hegerl U; Mergl R
    J Psychopharmacol; 2010 Apr; 24(4):445-8. PubMed ID: 19825901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The Montgomery Asberg and the Hamilton ratings of depression: a comparison of measures.
    Carmody TJ; Rush AJ; Bernstein I; Warden D; Brannan S; Burnham D; Woo A; Trivedi MH
    Eur Neuropsychopharmacol; 2006 Dec; 16(8):601-11. PubMed ID: 16769204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The rater and rating instrument as sources of variance in evaluating drug efficacy in depression.
    Raskin A; Crook T
    Psychopharmacol Bull; 1975 Jul; 11(3):16-7. PubMed ID: 1153643
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Maprotiline, nomifensine, mianserin, zimelidine: a review of antidepressant efficacy in in-patients.
    Montgomery SA
    Neuropharmacology; 1980 Dec; 19(12):1185-90. PubMed ID: 6449677
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Development of a rating scale for depressive illness.
    Cronholm B; Schalling D; Asberg M
    Mod Probl Pharmacopsychiatry; 1974; 7(0):139-50. PubMed ID: 4412781
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The role of rating scales in the use of antidepressants.
    Zung WW
    Dis Nerv Syst; 1976 Mar; 37(3 PT 2):22-4. PubMed ID: 1253669
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Why the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale endures.
    Bech P; Engelhardt N; Evans KR; Gibertini M; Kalali AH; Kobak KA; Lipsitz JD; Williams JB; Pearson JD; Rothman M
    Am J Psychiatry; 2005 Dec; 162(12):2396; author reply 2397-8. PubMed ID: 16330618
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Why the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale endures.
    Corruble E; Hardy P
    Am J Psychiatry; 2005 Dec; 162(12):2394; author reply 2397-8. PubMed ID: 16330615
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Sensitivity of rating scales completed by psychiatrists, nurses and patients to antidepressant drug effects.
    Raskin A; Crook TH
    J Psychiatr Res; 1976; 13(1):31-41. PubMed ID: 966189
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Why the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale endures.
    Hsieh CL; Hsieh CH
    Am J Psychiatry; 2005 Dec; 162(12):2395; author reply 2397-8. PubMed ID: 16330617
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Relationship between the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale in depressed elderly: a meta-analysis.
    Heo M; Murphy CF; Meyers BS
    Am J Geriatr Psychiatry; 2007 Oct; 15(10):899-905. PubMed ID: 17911366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparative meta-analysis of Clinical Global Impressions change in antidepressant trials.
    Spielmans GI; McFall JP
    J Nerv Ment Dis; 2006 Nov; 194(11):845-52. PubMed ID: 17102709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.