"this is part of a long term campaign to promote ‘national depression centers’. This seems like step in grand plan of National Network of Depression Centers"
…To achieve this, we must develop sustainable networks with “big-data” capacities. Networks that come and go with brief grant funding will not suffice. Early prototypes such as the National Network of Depression Centers have been started for depression, bipolar illness, and related conditions, but financial supports will be needed to fully develop their potential.
The National Network of Depression Centers is a non-profit consortium of twenty academic institutions all with varying implementations of a Depression Center with both Clinical and research arms. It looks to be modeled after the various Cancer Center networks:
|National Network of Depression Centers|
Dr. John F. Greden is the Rachel Upjohn Professor of Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences in the Department of Psychiatry, Founder and Executive Director of the University of Michigan Depression Center, Founding Chair, National Network of Depression Centers [NNDC], and Research Professor in the Molecular and Behavioral Neuroscience Institute. He joined the faculty at the University of Michigan Medical School in 1974 and served as Chair of Michigan’s Department of Psychiatry from 1985 to 2007 when he stepped down to focus on directing the Depression Center and developing the NNDC.
Was there a conflict of interest on Dr. Greden’s part? Absolutely. Had he declared, "Dr. Greden is Executive Director of the National Network of Depression Centers and Executive Director of the University of Michigan Depression Center" for which we can only presume he is paid, one would’ve read that editorial in a very different light. Should the American Journal of Psychiatry have published an infomercial as an editorial? Absolutely not. And what about it being associated with an article about an NIMH Study penned by Dr. Trivedi? And what about the fact that Dr. Greden’s editorial is filled with Dr. Trivedi’s very familiar jargon about measurement-based care, sequencing, etc.? even though this paper didn’t support that sequencing algorithms are effective? and even though STAR*D is hardly a good example of measurement-based anything [see objectively… ]?