We recalculated the found numbers and percentages of justified and unjustified treatment with antidepressants in our sample to the original population of 10,677 persons who returned a completed K-10 plus screener questionnaire. This backward projection was done in several steps, which can be derived by reading Figure 1 from the bottom up, or from table 1. In the first step, we split our sample into four groups; no use of an antidepressant, justified useEtanercept justified use and unjustified use. We will refer to these groups as ‘‘justification groups’’. After that, we registered the number of screen-positives and screen-negatives in each of the justification groups. These numbers were then multiplied by a correction factor or total screen-negatives divided by number of screennegatives in our sample ) to calculate the estimated number of persons from each justification group in the original screen-positive and screen-negative groups. Finally, we added up the estimated numbers screen-positives and negatives for each justification group. The current study has several very strong points. First, we used a screening method to recruit participants which did not affect the awareness of patient’s psychiatric status for GPs in our study. This means that the GPs could only rely on their own diagnostic judgments also for their prescription of antidepressants. The second strength of this study is its large sample size,Lambrolizumab which is rather rare in a primary care study. The third strength is that all patients were diagnosed based on a structured interview and not on the GPs’ records. However there are also limitations. First, the last mentioned strength is also a weakness, as the structured interview we used does not assess the degree of suffering and dysfunction, which should be part of the GPs’ consideration for antidepressant treatment according to the guideline recommendations. Second, the representativeness of the population may be limited.