↓ Skip to main content

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of escitalopram in patients with social anxiety disorder in Japan

Overview of attention for article published in Current Medical Research & Opinion, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of escitalopram in patients with social anxiety disorder in Japan
Published in
Current Medical Research & Opinion, February 2016
DOI 10.1185/03007995.2016.1146663
Pubmed ID
Authors

Satoshi Asakura, Taiji Hayano, Atsushi Hagino, Tsukasa Koyama

Abstract

Objective This randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study compared the efficacy and tolerability of escitalopram (10 and 20 mg/day) in Japanese patients with social anxiety disorder (SAD). Research design and methods Patients aged 18-64 years with a primary diagnosis of DSM-IV-TR defined SAD, a Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale Japanese version (LSAS-J) total score ≥60 and a Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) score ≥4 at baseline were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to placebo, escitalopram 10 mg or escitalopram 20 mg. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to Week 12 in the LSAS-J total score for both escitalopram 10 mg and 20 mg versus placebo (ANCOVA, FAS, LOCF), using a hierarchical testing procedure. Pre-specified secondary endpoints included LSAS-J sensitivity analyses. Clinical trial registration This study has the www.japic.or.jp identifier: JapicCTI-121842. Results For the primary efficacy endpoint, the difference from placebo in the LSAS-J was -3.9 (p = 0.089) for escitalopram 10 mg. Since the superiority of escitalopram 10 mg over placebo was not confirmed, an analysis without multiplicity adjustment was made, which showed a difference for escitalopram 20 mg versus placebo of -9.8 (p < 0.001). In pre-specified sensitivity analyses, the difference versus placebo was -4.9 (p = 0.035) (ANCOVA, FAS, OC) and -5.0 (p = 0.028) (MMRM, FAS) (escitalopram 10 mg) and -10.1 (p < 0.001) (ANCOVA, FAS, OC) and -10.6 (p < 0.001) (MMRM, FAS) (escitalopram 20 mg). Common adverse events (incidence ≥5% and significantly different from placebo) were somnolence, nausea and ejaculation disorder. Conclusion Escitalopram was efficacious, safe and well tolerated by patients with SAD in Japan. Study limitations are discussed including patient characteristics.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 19 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 30%
Psychology 14 21%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Mathematics 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 23 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 June 2021.
All research outputs
#4,894,533
of 26,314,361 outputs
Outputs from Current Medical Research & Opinion
#508
of 3,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,267
of 409,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Medical Research & Opinion
#11
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,314,361 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,698 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 409,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.