Research on pharmaceutical treatment of<unk>  in particular is sparse. Certain medications, such as fluoxetine, were found in numerous studies to be effective at reducing symptom severity; however, these studies involved open-label trials,<unk> -blind randomized trials that lack placebo conditions, and small sample sizes. Thus, placebo-controlled trials are needed in order to determine adequate and unique treatments for<unk> . In addition, the considerable burden depression places upon communities and societies (Goldney & Fisher, 2004) emphasizes the need for additional research into the treatment of chronic depression. Hellerstein et al. (1994) theorized that antidepressant medications could be used to ameliorate both MDD and PDD; a pharmaceutical trial found that fluoxetine facilitated remission in 57.1% of patients after five months of treatment. In addition, Miller, Norman, and Keitner (1999) conducted an intervention in which one cohort received pharmaceutical treatment while another cohort received both pharmaceutical and therapeutic treatment. Their results indicated that those who received the combined intervention were more functional—in a social sense—as well as relieved of their depression than those who received the pharmaceutical intervention alone (Miller, Norman, & Keitner, 1999). However, the researchers found that the effect disappeared at both the 6 and 12-month follow-up assessments. Vasile et al. (2012) conducted a pharmaceutical trial with 16 patients with<unk>  (who had comorbid alcohol dependence) who were treated and monitored for six months. Results showed that three antidepressants—venlafaxine, duloxetine, and milnacipran—were associated with substantial improvement; venlafaxine was the most effective of the three antidepressants. Koran, Aboujaoude, and Gamel (2007) conducted a pharmaceutical trial with 24 adults who received duloxetine over the course of a 12-week period. Results showed that duloxetine was successful in the treatment of both PDD as well as<unk> . However, the researchers' trial was an open-label trial; as a result, the researchers called for a<unk> -blind and placebo-controlled trial to be conducted in order to further validate the benefits the medication seems to provide. In addition, Waslick et al. (1999) used duloxetine to treat 19 children and adolescents with either PDD or<unk> ; after eight weeks of pharmaceutical treatment, 11 of the patients failed to meet the classification criteria for one of the two disorders, which led to the conclusion that duloxetine was a medication that appeared to provide relief from PDD and<unk>  in children and adolescents. However, the aforementioned trial (in addition to Koran et al.'s (2007) trial) was an open-label trial, which the authors noted as a limitation. Hirschfield et al. (1998) conducted a 12-week randomized controlled trial (RCT) that involved the administration of sertraline or imipramine, after which 324 of 623 patients either qualified for remission or experienced a substantive improvement in clinical presentation. In a<unk> -blind, fixed-dose trial that involved the use of either the monoamine oxidase inhibitor (MAOI) moclobemide or the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) fluoxetine, Duarte, Mikkelsen, and DeliniStula (1996) were able to facilitate a minimum of a 50% score reduction on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). 71% of cases that involved moclobemide—versus 38% of cases that involved fluoxetine—were determined to achieve the aforementioned desired outcome. As a result, the researchers concluded that both antidepressants were similar in their abilities to treat<unk>  in an effective fashion. However, the lack of a placebo control undermines the extent to which the results can be applied. Marin, Kocsis, Frances, and Parides (1994) conducted an eight-week open trial that entailed the administration of desipramine to 42 individuals with<unk>  and 33 individuals with PDD. The researchers found that 70% of the PDD patients experienced a substantial improvement in clinical presentation; the proportion associated with the<unk> -cohort was said to be similar. However, the lack of blindness as well as a placebo control notes a considerable limitation of the aforementioned research. Goldney and Bain (2006) found that those who have<unk>  receive some form of treatment on a more substantial basis than their MDD-alone and PDD-alone counterparts. To elaborate, the authors measured that, in Australia, 41.4% of those evaluated with<unk>  received treatment three or more times over the course of the previous month, whereas 34.5% of those with MDD alone; 23.2% of those with PDD alone; and 10.3% of those who were not depressed received treatment three or more times over the course of the previous month (Goldney & Bain, 2006). In addition, the researchers concluded that those with<unk>  acquire a more substantial number of treatment visits per month (a mean of 4.3) when compared to their MDD-alone counterparts (a mean of 3.0); their PDD-alone counterparts (a mean of 2.6); and their non-depressed counterparts (a mean of 1.5).
Double depression
Long-term depression
Retarded depression
Outline of bipolar disorder
Treatment-resistant depression
Depression 
Late life depression
Recurrent brief depression