Letters Restoring Study 329

Authors’ reply to Sasich and Linden

BMJ 2015; 351 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h5412 (Published 14 October 2015) Cite this as: BMJ 2015;351:h5412
  1. Joanna Le Noury, research psychologist1,
  2. John M Nardo, retired clinical assistant professor2,
  3. David Healy, professor1,
  4. Jon Jureidini, clinical professor3,
  5. Melissa Raven, postdoctoral fellow3,
  6. Catalin Tufanaru, research associate4,
  7. Elia Abi-Jaoude, staff psychiatrist5
  1. 1School of Medical Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, Wales, UK
  2. 2Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
  3. 3Critical and Ethical Mental Health Research Group, Robinson Research Institute, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia
  4. 4Joanna Briggs Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Adelaide
  5. 5Department of Psychiatry, Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
  1. Jon.Jureidini{at}adelaide.edu.au

Restoring Study 329 was important for several reasons. Firstly, in October 2002 the Food and Drug Administration issued an approvable letter to GlaxoSmithKline’s application to license paroxetine for paediatric major depressive disorder (MDD) and obsessive-compulsive disorder despite noting “we agree that the results from . . . [Study] 329 . . . …

View Full Text

Sign in

Log in through your institution

Free trial

Register for a free trial to thebmj.com to receive unlimited access to all content on thebmj.com for 14 days.
Sign up for a free trial

Subscribe