Depression the Purpose of the Journal Study

Depression The purpose of the journal study in the Annals of Internal Medicine is to update the 2002 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) with the 2012 recommendation statement on depression screening in adults. There were a number of problems with the 2002 study in terms of the reliability of the evidence, limiting the use of its recommendations.

Based upon the experiences in the formulation of first recommendation's result and by using the 2002 results and comparing them in a longitudinal fashion with those of 2012, more definitive results were achieved to recommend depression screening in the appropriate clinical settings to detect and prevent suicide. The accuracy of such screenings and the supporting evidence is presently much better, justifying a wider use of them to better treat patients suffering from depression. Introduction The purpose of the journal study is to update the 2002 U.S.

Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation statement on depression screening in adults. The health question deals with the benefit and/or harm of screening primary care patients for depression (U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, 2009, 784. The population that the update is addressed to non-pregnant adults, and older adults. The update is not for children and adolescents that a separate population.

Analysis The guideline development group includes individuals from all the relevant professional group due to the composition of the USPSTF which was made up of a cross section of health care professionals and former and present government officials who compose an independent, voluntary body. Although independent, the USPSTF is supported due to the U.S. Congress mandating this support from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (ibid., 789). The views and preferences of the target population by such a group is balanced and weighed.

The target users of the guideline were clearly defined as healthcare providers in institutions and in psychotherapy practices (ibid.). Systematic methods were used to search for evidence which included direct evidence concerning depression screening programs and their ability to improve health outcomes. These included questions concerning accuracy in the screening instruments to identify depressed adults in primary care settings and also the of treatment of depressed adults with psychotherapy and antidepressants.

New areas of research that were considered included the appropriateness of the treatment of depression in the older adult patients (ibid., 785). The criteria for the selection of the evidence to be considered was rigorous and included longitudinal information from the 2002 task force study. The USPSTF felt by 2004 that the quality of evidence for the 2002 study was insufficient in areas such as screening, but now feels that screening is effective in detecting suicide risk (ibid., 786). The methods for formulating the recommendations described are sound. Based upon this.

The USPSTF recommends screening adults for depression when there are staff-assisted depression care supports in place to insure accurate diagnoses and effective treatment and follow-up. Otherwise, the recommendations are against routine screening outside the assisted care environment (ibid., 784). The health benefits, side effects and risks have been effectively considered so the recommendations to treat depressed adults and older adults were identified by screening in primary care settings by the use of antidepressants or psychotherapy (ibid., 785). Given the better quality of the evidence than in the 2002 recommendation.

The links between the recommendations and the supporting evidence is much superior. The article has been externally interviewed by scholars in a peer review process (ibid.). The procedures for updating the guideline were clearly provided in the journal from the 2002 study (ibid., 784). The recommendations are specific and unambiguous and the different options for management of the condition or health issues are clearly presented for different uses in clinical settings.

For instance, although the 2012 recommendation presented impressive evidence of the efficacy of using clinical screening, the recommendation found insufficient evidence to establish the effectiveness.