Document Type


Publication Date



Clinical practice guidelines are used increasingly across medical specialties and settings, making evaluation of their utility and validity a critical public health issue. In this paper, we describe some of the challenges that specialty organizations face as they try to ensure that their guidelines are trustworthy and useful. We examine the practice guidelines for Major Depressive Disorder recently published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA), identify five sources of potential bias that may affect the guideline development process and offer suggestions based on our review. For example, even for mild depression, this guideline privileges pharmacotherapy over other interventions, despite questions about the risk/benefit ratio and the increasing concern over the iatrogenic harms of SSRIs and SNRIs. We compare recommendations from international scientific groups (e.g. NICE) with those produced by specialty societies in an effort to demonstrate some of the ways in which conflicts of interest, both intellectual and financial, may unduly influence guidelines.


Published in The International Journal of Person Centered Medicine, Vol. 1, Iss. 4:


International Journal of Person-Centered Medicine



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.