ArticlePloS one2020
Trends in mental health clinical research: Characterizing the ClinicalTrials.gov registry from 2007-2018.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Characteristic of clinical trials related to traumatic brain injury registered on ClinicalTrials.gov over the past two decades (2004-2023).Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Fighting for recovery on multiple fronts: The past, present, and future of clinical trials for spinal cord injury.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2022Pooled it
- Stepping into day treatment approach versus inpatient treatment for adults with anorexia nervosa: the DAISIES RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Trial
- Advancing the quality and safety of behavioural interventions in mental health research: A how-to guide from the MAGNET Clinical Trial Network.The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2025Article
- Epigenetics and suicidal behavior in adolescents: a critical review.Epigenomics · 2025Review
- Exploring the Moderating Effect of Control Group Type on Intervention Effectiveness in School-Based Anxiety and Depression Prevention: Findings from a Rapid Review and Network Meta-analysis.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2025Review
- Review of mental health research in Turkiye: A view from ClinicalTrials.gov.Dusunen adam : Bakirkoy Ruh ve Sinir Hastaliklari Hastanesi yayin organi · 2024Article
- Advancing the Actionability of Mental Health Information: Identifying Online, Evidence-Based Mental Health Resources.Administration and policy in mental health · 2023Article
- Autopsy of a failed trial part 1: A qualitative investigation of clinician's views on and experiences of the implementation of the DAISIES trial in UK-based intensive eating disorder services.European eating disorders review : the journal of the Eating Disorders Association · 2023Article
- ARC: a framework for access, reciprocity and conduct in psychedelic therapies.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Ancient Roots of Today's Emerging Renaissance in Psychedelic Medicine.Culture, medicine and psychiatry · 2022Article
- Psychosis and psychedelics: Historical entanglements and contemporary contrasts.Transcultural psychiatry · 2022Article
- Revisiting the seven pillars of RDoC.BMC medicine · 2022Article
- Results Reporting and Early Termination of Childhood Obesity Trials Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Clinical trials and tribulations: lessons from spinal cord injury studies registered on ClinicalTrials.gov.Spinal cord · 2021Article
- Article
- A Moving Target: How We Define Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder Can Double Its Prevalence.The Journal of clinical psychiatry · 2021Article
- Updated analysis of pediatric clinical studies registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, 2008-2019.BMC pediatrics · 2021Article
- Characteristic and Early Discontinuation of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Trials Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Trends in US pediatric mental health clinical trials: An analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov from 2007-2018.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While the epidemiologic burden of mental health disorders in the United States has been well described over the past decade, we know relatively little about trends in how these disorders are being studied through clinical research. We examined all US interventional mental health trials submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov between October 1, 2007 and April 30, 2018 to identify trends in trial characteristics, comparisons with non-mental health trials, and trial attributes associated with discontinuation and results reporting. International data were excluded to minimize potential confounding. Over this period, mental health and non-mental health trials grew at similar rates, though Industry and US government-funded trials declined and academic medical center/hospital/other (AMC/Hosp/Oth) funded trials grew faster in mental health research. The proportion of trials with safeguards against bias, including blinding and oversight by data monitoring committees (DMCs), decreased. This occurred during growth in the proportion of trials studying behavioral and non-pharmacological interventions, which often cannot be blinded and do not require DMC oversight. There was concurrent decline in pharmaceutical trials. There was significant growth in trials studying Non-DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-5) conditions (e.g. suicidality and wellness), as well as substance use, anxiety, and neurocognitive disorders. One in 12 trials was discontinued. Trial discontinuation was associated with industry and AMC/Hosp/Oth funders, pharmaceutical interventions, and lack of DMC oversight. Only 29.9% of completed trials reported results to the registry. Decreased results reporting was associated with behavioral interventions, phase 1 trials, and industry and AMC/Hosp/Oth funders. The main implications of these data are that funding is shifting away from traditional government and industry sources, there is increasing interest in non-pharmacological treatments and Non-DSM conditions, and there are changing norms in trial design characteristics regarding safeguards against bias. These trends can guide researchers and funding bodies when considering the trajectory of future mental health research.
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.