Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17636776›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2007

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for depressive disorders in children and adolescents.

S Hetrick, S Merry, J McKenzie, P Sindahl, M Proctor

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

65 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 180 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Time-lag bias in trials of pediatric antidepressants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry · 2011
    Pooled it
  5. Depression in children and adolescents.BMJ clinical evidence · 2009
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

S HetrickORYGEN Research Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Locked Bag 10, 35 Poplar Road, Parkville, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 3054. shetrick@unimelb.edu.au
S Merry
J McKenzie
P Sindahl
M Proctor
Leo Pharma (Australia) · AUMental Health Foundation · GBUniversity of Auckland · NZUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDepressive disorders are common in young people and are associated with significant negative impacts. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are often used, however, evidence of their effectiveness in children and adolescents is not clear. Furthermore, there have been warnings against their use in this population due to concerns about increased risk of suicidal ideation and behaviour.

objectivesTo determine the efficacy and adverse outcomes, including definitive suicidal behaviour and suicidal ideation, of SSRIs compared to placebo in the treatment of depressive disorders in children and adolescents. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the CCDAN Trials Register, MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO and CENTRAL. Reference lists were checked, letters were sent to key researchers and internet databases searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two or three review authors selected the trials, assessed the quality and extracted trial and outcome data. We used a fixed-effect meta-analysis. The relative risk was used to summarise dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference to summarise continuous measures. MAIN

resultsTwelve trials were eligible for inclusion, with ten providing usable data. At 8-12 weeks, there was evidence that children and adolescents 'responded' to treatment with SSRIs (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.41). There was also evidence of an increased risk of suicidal ideation and behaviour for those prescribed SSRIs (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.72). Fluoxetine was the only SSRI where there was consistent evidence from three trials that it was effective in reducing depression symptoms in both children and adolescents (CDRS-R treatment effect -5.63, 95% CI -7.38 to -3.88), and 'response' to treatment (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.32). Where rates of adverse events were reported, this was higher for those prescribed SSRIs. AUTHORS'

conclusionsCaution is required to interpret the results. First, there were methodological issues, including high attrition, issues regarding measurement instruments and clinical usefulness of outcomes, often variously defined across trials. Second, patients seen in clinical practice are likely to be more unwell, and at greater risk of suicide, compared to those in the trials, and it is unclear how this group would respond to SSRIs. This needs to be considered, along with the evidence of an increased risk of suicide related outcomes in those treated with SSRIs. It is unclear what the effect of SSRIs is on suicide completion. While untreated depression is associated with the risk of completed suicide and impacts on functioning, it is unclear whether SSRIs would modify this risk in a clinically meaningful way.

Indexed as

AdolescentAntidepressive AgentsChildCitalopramDepressive DisorderFluoxetineHumansParoxetineRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelective Serotonin Reuptake InhibitorsSertralineSuicideAntidepressive AgentsCitalopramFluoxetineParoxetineSelective Serotonin Reuptake InhibitorsSertraline

Identifiers

PMID17636776
OpenAlexW1935785240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.