SynthesisNeuropsychopharmacology reports2025
Efficacy of Pharmacological Interventions in Milder Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Neuropsychopharmacology reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- The Therapeutic Home Environment for Chronic Diseases: A Transdisciplinary Ecosystem for Achieving Migraine Freedom and Managing Comorbid Anxiety, Insomnia, and Chronic Pain.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMild depression lacks a consistent definition across diagnostic criteria and rating scales, posing challenges to standardizing treatment strategies. International guidelines predominantly recommend psychotherapy as the first-line treatment for mild depression, while the use of antidepressants remains contentious. Supplements such as omega-3 fatty acids, St. John's Wort, and magnesium have garnered attention as alternative therapeutic options for depression. This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy of pharmacological interventions, including supplements, in the treatment of mild depression.
methodsComprehensive searches were performed in PubMed and Embase through November 2024 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating pharmacotherapy or supplements for mild depression diagnosed using standardized criteria. Eligible studies underwent screening and risk of bias assessment utilizing the ROB2 tool. Data on remission rates, symptom improvement, dropout rates, and adverse events were extracted, with meta-analyses conducted where applicable.
resultsEight RCTs comprising 1049 participants met inclusion criteria. Among the agents studied, St. John's Wort was analyzed in two trials, both comparing it to fluoxetine. A meta-analysis found no significant difference in response rates between the two treatments (risk ratio [RR] = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.78-1.18) or dropout rates (RR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.62-1.88). For other agents, single studies evaluated their effects. Eicosapentaenoic acid and Rhodiola rosea demonstrated significant improvements in depressive symptoms compared to placebo. In non-blinded trials, magnesium chloride showed efficacy in alleviating depressive symptoms. Other interventions, such as lavender, lemon balm, and transcranial electroacupuncture stimulation, were as effective as antidepressants. Conversely, S-adenosylmethionine did not produce significant improvements relative to placebo.
conclusionThis review demonstrates that certain supplements, such as eicosapentaenoic acids and Rhodiola rosea, are therapeutic options for mild depression. However, no RCTs compared antidepressants directly to placebo for mild depression. The paucity of high-quality RCTs exclusively targeting mild depression limits definitive conclusions, warranting further rigorous 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.