ArticleThe International journal of risk & safety in medicine2020
Presentation of benefits and harms of antidepressants on websites: A cross-sectional study.
Article in The International journal of risk & safety in medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- The serotonin theory of depression: a systematic umbrella review of the evidence.Molecular psychiatry · 2023Pooled it
- Without Informed Consent: The Global Export of a Failed Paradigm of Care.Health and human rights · 2025Article
- Internet Use for Obtaining Medicine Information: Cross-sectional Survey.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- 'The Explanation You Have Been Looking For': Neurobiology as Promise and Hermeneutic Closure.Culture, medicine and psychiatry · 2022Article
- Long-Term Use of Benzodiazepines, Stimulants and Lithium is Not Evidence-Based.Clinical neuropsychiatry · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany people use the Internet for obtaining information about their medications.
objectiveTo investigate whether information about antidepressants on popular websites reflects the scientific evidence and enables people to make informed choices.
methodsCross-sectional study using a checklist with 14 predefined criteria of 39 websites from 10 countries.
resultsAll 39 websites mentioned the benefits of antidepressants. Twenty-nine (74%) websites attributed depression to a "chemical imbalance" or claimed they could fix an imbalance. Sexual dysfunction was mentioned as a harmful effect on 23 (59%) websites while five (13%) mentioned emotional numbing. Twenty-five (64%) stated that antidepressants may cause increased suicidal ideation, but 23 (92%) of them contained incorrect information, and only two (5%) websites noted that the suicide risk is increased in people of all ages. Twenty-eight websites (72%) warned patients about withdrawal effects but only one stated that antidepressants can be addictive.
conclusionsNone of the websites met our predefined criteria. The information was generally inaccurate and unhelpful and has potential to lead to inappropriate use and overuse of antidepressants and reduce the likelihood that people will seek better options for depression like psychotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.