ReviewNeuropsychiatric disease and treatment2026
Efficacy and Safety of Escitalopram for Major Depressive Disorder in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Age-Specific Findings.
Review in Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy, acceptability, and safety of escitalopram for pediatric major depressive disorder (MDD) through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: We searched Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Scopus (January 2001- October 2025) for randomized controlled trials comparing escitalopram with placebo in children and adolescents (ages 6-17) with MDD. The primary outcome was the change in the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R). Secondary outcomes included Clinical Global Impressions scores, response rates, and discontinuation rates. Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias using Cochrane tools. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed; certainty was evaluated using GRADE. Results: Three RCTs (664 participants) were identified: two acute trials (Wagner 2006, n=268; Emslie 2009, n=316) and one continuation trial (Saito 2023, n=80). Meta-analysis of acute trials included 572 participants (completion rates 81-82%). Escitalopram demonstrated small and borderline statistically significant improvements versus placebo: CDRS-R (weighted mean difference [WMD]=-2.46, 95% CI: -4.83 to -0.09, I Limitations: Universal industry sponsorship, high placebo response (52-53% by CGI-I ≤2 in original publications), mixed trial results, limited evidence for children ages 6-11, and lack of independent replication. Conclusion: Escitalopram demonstrates small and borderline statistically significant efficacy for adolescent MDD (aged 12-17 years). Short-term tolerability is acceptable; however, no definitive conclusion on long-term safety can be drawn, and evidence is insufficient to support use in children aged 6-11 years. It may be considered when fluoxetine is unsuitable, combined with psychosocial interventions and close monitoring. Further independent studies are needed. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42019141268.
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.