English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

With increasing numbers of treatment options available for patients with major depression over the last decade and the growing body of evidence describing their efficacy and safety, clinicians often find it difficult to determine the best and most appropriate evidence-based treatment for each patient. Systematic reviews utilizing statistical methods that synthesize and evaluate data from a number of studies have become increasingly more available over the past decade. We review major findings and lessons learned from salient examples of quantitative analyses of antidepressant research and provide recommendations for meta-analysts, journal and grant reviewers, and research 'consumers' (ie, clinicians) for conducting, reporting, and evaluating such analyses.

Comparing the Effects of Antidepressants: Consensus Guidelines for Evaluating Quantitative Reviews of Antidepressant Efficacy