If SM’s intervention is as effective as it reports, then presumably that effect would be demonstrated not only on the PHQ-9 but also on more “objective” measures like double-blinded observer ratings of psychomotor agitation/retardation between treatment and control groups. Although psychomotor effects are only a fairly small part of the disease burden of depression, their improvement or non-improvement vs. controls would update my assessment of the methodological concerns expressed in this post. Same would be true of tests of concentration, etc.
I agree that would be a big improvement. I guess the only metrics in the big RCT is their “competency tests” but I don’t think that’s sufficient and I doubt we are going to see anything along those lines soon.
If SM’s intervention is as effective as it reports, then presumably that effect would be demonstrated not only on the PHQ-9 but also on more “objective” measures like double-blinded observer ratings of psychomotor agitation/retardation between treatment and control groups. Although psychomotor effects are only a fairly small part of the disease burden of depression, their improvement or non-improvement vs. controls would update my assessment of the methodological concerns expressed in this post. Same would be true of tests of concentration, etc.
I agree that would be a big improvement. I guess the only metrics in the big RCT is their “competency tests” but I don’t think that’s sufficient and I doubt we are going to see anything along those lines soon.
100% agree, at least some objectve measure could be added—wouldn’t cost mch extra