Substance use during pregnancy and risk of postpartum depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction: Postpartum depression (PPD) is a prevalent mental health condition affecting women globally within the first year following childbirth. Substance use during pregnancy has been associated with an increased risk of developing PPD, but the evidence remains inconclusive. This meta-analysis aims to comprehensively assess the effects of different substances on PPD risk, exploring potential modifiers and confounding factors. Objectives: To examine the proportion of PPD among substance users during pregnancy, compared to non-users, and investigate the specific risk associated with different substances (tobacco, alcohol, and non-specified substance use/multiple substance use). Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted from inception to November 2022 using the Web of Science database (Clarivate Analytics), incorporating Web of Science Core Collection, the BIOSIS Citation Index, the KCI-Korean Journal Database, MEDLINE®, the Russian Science Citation Index, the SciELO Citation Index, and the Cochrane Central Register of Reviews, and Ovid/PsycINFO databases. Inclusion criteria comprised original studies with pregnant women, using validated depression scales and substance use reporting. Results: Among the 26 included studies, encompassing 514,441 women, the pooled prevalence of PPD among substance users during pregnancy was 29% (95% CI 25-33). Meta-analyzes revealed an overall odds ratio (OR) of 3.67 (95% CI 2.31-5.85, p < 0.01) indicating a significantly higher risk of PPD among substance users compared to non-users. Subgroup analyzes demonstrated a higher risk for women with non-specified or multiple substance use (OR 4.67, 95% CI 2.59-8.41; p < 0.01) and tobacco use (OR 4.01, 95% CI 2.23-7.20; p < 0.01). Alcohol use showed a trend toward higher risk that did not reach statistical significance (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.00-3.55; p = 0.051). Conclusion: This meta-analysis provides evidence of an increased risk of PPD among pregnant substance users, particularly those using multiple substances or tobacco. However, caution is needed in interpreting the association with alcohol use due to its non-significant result. Systematic review registration: This study protocol was registered at PROSPERO (registration number: CCRD42022375500).

Universal and Selective Interventions to Prevent Poor Mental Health Outcomes in Young People: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Much is not known about the efficacy of interventions to prevent poor mental health outcomes in young people by targeting either the general population (universal prevention) or asymptomatic individuals with high risk of developing a mental disorder (selective prevention). METHODS: We conducted a PRISMA/MOOSE-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of Web of Science to identify studies comparing post-test efficacy (effect size [ES]; Hedges' g) of universal or selective interventions for poor mental health outcomes versus control groups, in samples with mean age <35 years (PROSPERO: CRD42018102143). Measurements included random-effects models, I2 statistics, publication bias, meta-regression, sensitivity analyses, quality assessments, number needed to treat, and population impact number. RESULTS: 295 articles (447,206 individuals; mean age = 15.4) appraising 17 poor mental health outcomes were included. Compared to control conditions, universal and selective interventions improved (in descending magnitude order) interpersonal violence, general psychological distress, alcohol use, anxiety features, affective symptoms, other emotional and behavioral problems, consequences of alcohol use, posttraumatic stress disorder features, conduct problems, tobacco use, externalizing behaviors, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder features, and cannabis use, but not eating-related problems, impaired functioning, internalizing behavior, or sleep-related problems. Psychoeducation had the highest effect size for ADHD features, affective symptoms, and interpersonal violence. Psychotherapy had the highest effect size for anxiety features. CONCLUSION: Universal and selective preventive interventions for young individuals are feasible and can improve poor mental health outcomes.

Environmental risk factors, protective factors, and peripheral biomarkers for ADHD: an umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: Many potential environmental risk factors, environmental protective factors, and peripheral biomarkers for ADHD have been investigated, but the consistency and magnitude of their effects are unclear. We aimed to systematically appraise the published evidence of association between potential risk factors, protective factors, or peripheral biomarkers, and ADHD. METHODS: In this umbrella review of meta-analyses, we searched PubMed including MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, from database inception to Oct 31, 2019, and screened the references of relevant articles. We included systematic reviews that provided meta-analyses of observational studies that examined associations of potential environmental risk factors, environmental protective factors, or peripheral biomarkers with diagnosis of ADHD. We included meta-analyses that used categorical ADHD diagnosis criteria according to DSM, hyperkinetic disorder according to ICD, or criteria that were less rigorous than DSM or ICD, such as self-report. We excluded articles that did not examine environmental risk factors, environmental protective factors, or peripheral biomarkers of ADHD; articles that did not include a meta-analysis; and articles that did not present enough data for re-analysis. We excluded non-human studies, primary studies, genetic studies, and conference abstracts. We calculated summary effect estimates (odds ratio [OR], relative risk [RR], weighted mean difference [WMD], Cohen's d, and Hedges' g), 95% CI, heterogeneity I2 statistic, 95% prediction interval, small study effects, and excess significance biases. We did analyses under credibility ceilings, and assessed the quality of the meta-analyses with AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2). This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42019145032. FINDINGS: We identified 1839 articles, of which 35 were eligible for inclusion. These 35 articles yielded 63 meta-analyses encompassing 40 environmental risk factors and environmental protective factors (median cases 16 850, median population 91 954) and 23 peripheral biomarkers (median cases 175, median controls 187). Evidence of association was convincing (class I) for maternal pre-pregnancy obesity (OR 1·63, 95% CI 1·49 to 1·77), childhood eczema (1·31, 1·20 to 1·44), hypertensive disorders during pregnancy (1·29, 1·22 to 1·36), pre-eclampsia (1·28, 1·21 to 1·35), and maternal acetaminophen exposure during pregnancy (RR 1·25, 95% CI 1·17 to 1·34). Evidence of association was highly suggestive (class II) for maternal smoking during pregnancy (OR 1·6, 95% CI 1·45 to 1·76), childhood asthma (1·51, 1·4 to 1·63), maternal pre-pregnancy overweight (1·28, 1·21 to 1·35), and serum vitamin D (WMD -6·93, 95% CI -9·34 to -4·51). INTERPRETATION: Maternal pre-pregnancy obesity and overweight; pre-eclampsia, hypertension, acetaminophen exposure, and smoking during pregnancy; and childhood atopic diseases were strongly associated with ADHD. Previous familial studies suggest that maternal pre-pregnancy obesity, overweight, and smoking during pregnancy are confounded by familial or genetic factors, and further high-quality studies are therefore required to establish causality. FUNDING: None.

Prevention of Psychosis: Advances in Detection, Prognosis, and Intervention.

Importance: Detection, prognosis, and indicated interventions in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR-P) are key components of preventive psychiatry. Objective: To provide a comprehensive, evidence-based systematic appraisal of the advancements and limitations of detection, prognosis, and interventions for CHR-P individuals and to formulate updated recommendations. Evidence Review: Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Reviews, and Ovid/PsychINFO were searched for articles published from January 1, 2013, to June 30, 2019, to identify meta-analyses conducted in CHR-P individuals. MEDLINE was used to search the reference lists of retrieved articles. Data obtained from each article included first author, year of publication, topic investigated, type of publication, study design and number, sample size of CHR-P population and comparison group, type of comparison group, age and sex of CHR-P individuals, type of prognostic assessment, interventions, quality assessment (using AMSTAR [Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews]), and key findings with their effect sizes. Findings: In total, 42 meta-analyses published in the past 6 years and encompassing 81 outcomes were included. For the detection component, CHR-P individuals were young (mean [SD] age, 20.6 [3.2] years), were more frequently male (58%), and predominantly presented with attenuated psychotic symptoms lasting for more than 1 year before their presentation at specialized services. CHR-P individuals accumulated several sociodemographic risk factors compared with control participants. Substance use (33% tobacco use and 27% cannabis use), comorbid mental disorders (41% with depressive disorders and 15% with anxiety disorders), suicidal ideation (66%), and self-harm (49%) were also frequently seen in CHR-P individuals. CHR-P individuals showed impairments in work (Cohen d = 0.57) or educational functioning (Cohen d = 0.21), social functioning (Cohen d = 1.25), and quality of life (Cohen d = 1.75). Several neurobiological and neurocognitive alterations were confirmed in this study. For the prognosis component, the prognostic accuracy of CHR-P instruments was good, provided they were used in clinical samples. Overall, risk of psychosis was 22% at 3 years, and the risk was the highest in the brief and limited intermittent psychotic symptoms subgroup (38%). Baseline severity of attenuated psychotic (Cohen d = 0.35) and negative symptoms (Cohen d = 0.39) as well as low functioning (Cohen d = 0.29) were associated with an increased risk of psychosis. Controlling risk enrichment and implementing sequential risk assessments can optimize prognostic accuracy. For the intervention component, no robust evidence yet exists to favor any indicated intervention over another (including needs-based interventions and control conditions) for preventing psychosis or ameliorating any other outcome in CHR-P individuals. However, because the uncertainty of this evidence is high, needs-based and psychological interventions should still be offered. Conclusions and Relevance: This review confirmed recent substantial advancements in the detection and prognosis of CHR-P individuals while suggesting that effective indicated interventions need to be identified. This evidence suggests a need for specialized services to detect CHR-P individuals in primary and secondary care settings, to formulate a prognosis with validated psychometric instruments, and to offer needs-based and psychological interventions.