Considering the methodological limitations in the evidence base of antidepressants for depression: a reanalysis of a network meta-analysis

Author:

Munkholm KlausORCID,Paludan-Müller Asger Sand,Boesen Kim

Abstract

ObjectivesTo investigate whether the conclusion of a recent systematic review and network meta-analysis (Ciprianiet al) that antidepressants are more efficacious than placebo for adult depression was supported by the evidence.DesignReanalysis of a systematic review, with meta-analyses.Data sources522 trials (116 477 participants) as reported in the systematic review by Ciprianiet aland clinical study reports for 19 of these trials.AnalysisWe used the Cochrane Handbook’s risk of bias tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to evaluate the risk of bias and the certainty of evidence, respectively. The impact of several study characteristics and publication status was estimated using pairwise subgroup meta-analyses.ResultsSeveral methodological limitations in the evidence base of antidepressants were either unrecognised or underestimated in the systematic review by Ciprianiet al. The effect size for antidepressants versus placebo on investigator-rated depression symptom scales was higher in trials with a ‘placebo run-in’ study design compared with trials without a placebo run-in design (p=0.05). The effect size of antidepressants was higher in published trials compared with unpublished trials (p<0.0001). The outcome data reported by Ciprianiet aldiffered from the clinical study reports in 12 (63%) of 19 trials. The certainty of the evidence for the placebo-controlled comparisons should be very low according to GRADE due to a high risk of bias, indirectness of the evidence and publication bias. The mean difference between antidepressants and placebo on the 17-item Hamilton depression rating scale (range 0–52 points) was 1.97 points (95% CI 1.74 to 2.21).ConclusionsThe evidence does not support definitive conclusions regarding the benefits of antidepressants for depression in adults. It is unclear whether antidepressants are more efficacious than placebo.

Funder

Nordic Cochrane Centre

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

General Medicine

Reference47 articles.

1. World Health Organisation, Media Centre. Depression: Fact Sheet. 2017 http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs369/en/ (accessed 1 May 2018).

2. Danish Health Authority. MedicinForbrug - Indblik 2017: Laveste antal brugere af antidepressiv medicin de seneste 10 år [Medicine usage - 2017: Lowest number of antidepressant users in the last 10 years]. 2017 https://sundhedsdatastyrelsen.dk/-/media/sds/filer/find-tal-og-analyser/laegemidler/analyser-om-antidepressiva/laveste-antal-brugere-af-antidepressiv-medicin-de-seneste-10-aar-(pdf)-2017.pdf?la=da (accessed 1 May 2018).

3. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2017. Antidepressant Use Among Persons Aged 12 and Over: United States, 2011–2014. Available from: accessed 1 May 2018.

4. The Guardian. NHS prescribed record number of antidepressants last year [updated 29 June 2017]. Available from: www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jun/29/nhs-prescribed-record-number-of-antidepressants-last-year. doi:10.1111/bdi.12609

5. Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs for the acute treatment of adults with major depressive disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis;Cipriani;Lancet,2018

Cited by 112 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Safe Deprescribing of Antidepressants;The Maudsley Deprescribing Guidelines – Antidepressants, Benzodiazepines, Gabapentinoids and Z‐drugs;2024-08-30

2. The role of psilocybin in depressive disorders;Current Medical Research and Opinion;2024-08-28

3. Introduction to Deprescribing Psychiatric Medications;The Maudsley Deprescribing Guidelines – Antidepressants, Benzodiazepines, Gabapentinoids and Z‐drugs;2024-08-23

4. Mind the Psychedelic Hype: Characterizing the Risks and Benefits of Psychedelics for Depression;Psychoactives;2024-04-16

5. Ligne directrice canadienne pour la prise en charge clinique de la consommation d’alcool à risque élevé et du trouble d’utilisation de l’alcool;Canadian Medical Association Journal;2024-03-10

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3