NICE v. SIGN on psychosis and schizophrenia: same roots, similar guidelines, different interpretations.

A recent editorial claimed that the 2014 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline on psychosis and schizophrenia, unlike its equivalent 2013 Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) guideline, is biased towards psychosocial treatments and against drug treatments. In this paper we underline that the NICE and SIGN guidelines recommend similar interventions, but that the NICE guideline has more rigorous methodology. Our analysis suggests that the authors of the editorial appear to have succumbed to bias themselves.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in childhood depression: systematic review of published versus unpublished data.

BACKGROUND: Questions concerning the safety of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in the treatment of depression in children led us to compare and contrast published and unpublished data on the risks and benefits of these drugs. METHODS: We did a meta-analysis of data from randomised controlled trials that evaluated an SSRI versus placebo in participants aged 5-18 years and that were published in a peer-reviewed journal or were unpublished and included in a review by the Committee on Safety of Medicines. The following outcomes were included: remission, response to treatment, depressive symptom scores, serious adverse events, suicide-related behaviours, and discontinuation of treatment because of adverse events. FINDINGS: Data for two published trials suggest that fluoxetine has a favourable risk-benefit profile, and unpublished data lend support to this finding. Published results from one trial of paroxetine and two trials of sertraline suggest equivocal or weak positive risk-benefit profiles. However, in both cases, addition of unpublished data indicates that risks outweigh benefits. Data from unpublished trials of citalopram and venlafaxine show unfavourable risk-benefit profiles. INTERPRETATION: Published data suggest a favourable risk-benefit profile for some SSRIs; however, addition of unpublished data indicates that risks could outweigh benefits of these drugs (except fluoxetine) to treat depression in children and young people. Clinical guideline development and clinical decisions about treatment are largely dependent on an evidence base published in peer-reviewed journals. Non-publication of trials, for whatever reason, or the omission of important data from published trials, can lead to erroneous recommendations for treatment. Greater openness and transparency with respect to all intervention studies is needed.

Are the SSRIs and atypical antidepressants safe and effective for children and adolescents?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article summarizes recent developments in the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and atypical antidepressants to treat children and adolescents with depression at a time when their use in this context has generated considerable controversy and confusion for clinicians, patients and their families. Recent reports and recommendations from drug regulators in the UK and the US are discussed, alongside other reviews and recently published randomized controlled trials. RECENT FINDINGS: It is now widely accepted that these drugs increase the risk of suicide-related behaviours and although recently published trials have been more positive, a meta-analysis of published and unpublished trials has cast doubt about efficacy. The evidence for publication bias in the studies considered is also raised and the implications discussed. There is some evidence, however, that the combination of psychological treatment with fluoxetine may be both effective and protective against the increased risk of suicide-related behaviours, although problems over blinding suggest further research is needed to clarify this potentially positive combination treatment. SUMMARY: Current evidence supports the conclusions of the UK drug regulator in warning against the use of all the newer antidepressants except fluoxetine in this age group, and alternative therapies should be sought in the first instance. Caution is needed in interpreting drug company sponsored trials given the evidence of selective reporting and publication bias. Combining fluoxetine with a psychological treatment such as cognitive-behavioural therapy is also worth considering.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for acute anxiety disorders in children and adolescents: study protocol for a network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Anxiety disorders are associated with significant public health burden in young individuals. Cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) is the most commonly used psychotherapy for anxiety disorders in children and adolescents, but previous reviews were hindered by a limited number of trials with direct comparisons between different psychotherapies and their deliveries. Consequently, the main aim of this research was to investigate the comparative efficacy and acceptability of various types and deliveries of psychotherapies for anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will systematically search PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ProQuest Dissertations and LiLACS for randomised controlled trials, regardless of whether participants received blinding or not, published from 1 January 1966 to 30 January 2015 (updated to 1 July 2015), that compared any psychotherapy with either a control condition or an active comparator with different types and/or different delivery formats for the acute treatment of anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. Data extraction, risk of bias and quality assessments will be independently extracted by two reviewers. The primary outcome for efficacy will be mean overall change scores in anxiety symptoms (self-rated or assessor-rated) from baseline to post-treatment between two groups. The acceptability of treatment will be measured as the proportion of patients who discontinued treatment during the acute phase of treatment. We will assess efficacy, based on the standardised mean difference (SMD), and acceptability, based on the OR, using a random-effects network meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical issues are foreseen. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be disseminated electronically and in print. The meta-analysis may be updated to inform and guide management of anxiety in children and adolescents. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42015016283.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Previous meta-analyses of psychotherapies for child and adolescent depression were limited because of the small number of trials with direct comparisons between two treatments. A network meta-analysis, a novel approach that integrates direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled studies, was undertaken to investigate the comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents. Systematic searches resulted in 52 studies (total N=3805) of nine psychotherapies and four control conditions. We assessed the efficacy at post-treatment and at follow-up, as well as the acceptability (all-cause discontinuation) of psychotherapies and control conditions. At post-treatment, only interpersonal therapy (IPT) and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) were significantly more effective than most control conditions (standardized mean differences, SMDs ranged from -0.47 to -0.96). Also, IPT and CBT were more beneficial than play therapy. Only psychodynamic therapy and play therapy were not significantly superior to waitlist. At follow-up, IPT and CBT were significantly more effective than most control conditions (SMDs ranged from -0.26 to -1.05), although only IPT retained this superiority at both short-term and long-term follow-up. In addition, IPT and CBT were more beneficial than problem-solving therapy. Waitlist was significantly inferior to other control conditions. With regard to acceptability, IPT and problem-solving therapy had significantly fewer all-cause discontinuations than cognitive therapy and CBT (ORs ranged from 0.06 to 0.33). These data suggest that IPT and CBT should be considered as the best available psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents. However, several alternative psychotherapies are understudied in this age group. Waitlist may inflate the effect of psychotherapies, so that psychological placebo or treatment-as-usual may be preferable as a control condition in psychotherapy trials.

Cognitive behavioural therapy for children and adolescents.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim is to summarize recent evidence from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence clinical guidelines and high-quality systematic reviews for the use of cognitive behavioural therapy to treat children and adolescents with mental health problems. RECENT FINDINGS: Data from meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials suggest that the best evidence for the potential of cognitive behavioural therapy is in the treatment of children and adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder, depression, obsessive compulsive disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder. More limited evidence suggests that attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and behavioural problems may also respond to cognitive behavioural therapy. We found no or insufficient evidence to determine whether cognitive behavioural therapy is useful for the treatment of antisocial behaviour, psychotic and related disorders, eating disorders, substance misuse and self-harm behaviour. SUMMARY: Clinical guidelines and recent systematic reviews establish that cognitive behavioural therapy has a potentially important role in improving the mental health of children and adolescents.

Memory deficits in Parkinson's disease.

The purpose of this study was to investigate deficits in recognition, recall, and prospective memory among Parkinson's disease (PD) patients, and to ascertain whether task difficulty and disease severity moderate these deficits. Comparisons were made between 41 nondemented PD participants, divided into early-stage and advanced-stage groups, and 41 matched controls. PD participants exhibited deficits in recognition, recall, and prospective memory. The advanced-stage PD group produced greater deficits than the early-stage PD group in all tasks, suggesting that these deficits increase in step with overall disease severity. The results of the task difficulty manipulation provide a partial explanation for the inconsistencies in the literature concerning the existence of recognition memory deficits in PD.