The efficacy of adding short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy to antidepressants in the treatment of depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data

The equivalence of psychodynamic therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy for depressive disorders in adults: A meta-analytic review

BACKGROUND

Meta-analyses on the relative efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy (PDT) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for depressive disorders are limited by heterogeneity in diagnostic samples and comparators and a lack of equivalence testing.

OBJECTIVE

We addressed this through a meta-analytic test of the equivalence of manualized PDT and CBT in treating adults with depressive disorders as determined by diagnostic interviews. Sensitivity analyses evaluated the impact of pretreatment differences, mixed diagnostic samples, author allegiance, study quality, year of publication and outliers on findings.

METHOD

A comprehensive literature search across multiple databases using reliable screening methods identified nine randomized controlled trials directly comparing manualized PDT and CBT for diagnosed depressive disorders in adults. Following pre-registration, we employed random effect models for our meta-analyses and two one-sided test procedures for equivalence testing.

RESULTS

Independent raters determined that all studies were of adequate quality. Immediately posttreatment, depressive symptoms were statistically equivalent across PDT and CBT (k = 9; g = -0.11, 90% confidence interval [90% CI]: -0.24 to 0.02, pequivalence = .048, pNHST = .212, I2 = 32.7). At follow-up, the longest time point within a year, depressive symptoms were neither statistically equivalent nor statistically different (k = 6; g = -0.16, 90% CI: -0.31 to -0.02, pequivalence = .184, pNHST = .126, I2 = 0.00).

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of manualized PDT is equal to manualized CBT immediately at posttreatment for depressive disorders in the adult general population. Nevertheless, insufficient data exists to reach a conclusion regarding equivalence at follow-up.

Efficacy of dynamic interpersonal therapy for major depressive disorder in China: results of a multicentered, three-arm, randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Dynamic interpersonal therapy (DIT) is a brief, structured psychodynamic psychotherapy with demonstrated efficacy in treating major depressive disorder (MDD). The aim of the study was to determine whether DIT is an acceptable and efficacious treatment for MDD patients in China.

METHOD

Patients were randomized to 16-week treatments with either DIT plus antidepressant medication (DIT + ADM; n = 66), general supportive therapy plus antidepressant medication (GST + ADM; n = 75) or antidepressant medication alone (ADM; n = 70). The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) administered by blind raters was the primary efficacy measure. Assessments were completed during the acute 16-week treatment and up to 12-month posttreatment.

RESULTS

The group × time interaction was significant for the primary outcome HAMD (F = 2.900, df1 = 10, df2 = 774.72, p = 0.001) in the acute treatment phase. Pairwise comparisons showed a benefit of DIT + ADM over ADM at weeks 12 [least-squares (LS) mean difference = -3.161, p = 0.007] and 16 (LS mean difference = -3.237, p = 0.004). Because of the unexpected high attrition during the posttreatment follow-up phase, analyses of follow-up data were considered exploratory. Differences between DIT + ADM and ADM remained significant at the 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up (ps range from 0.001 to 0.027). DIT + ADM had no advantage over GST + ADM during the acute treatment phase. However, at the 12-month follow-up, patients who received DIT remained less depressed.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute treatment with DIT or GST in combination with ADM was similarly efficacious in reducing depressive symptoms and yielded a better outcome than ADM alone. DIT may provide MDD patients with long-term benefits in symptom improvement but results must be viewed with caution.

Which patients benefit from adding short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy to antidepressants in the treatment of depression? A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

Adding short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (STPP) to antidepressants increases treatment efficacy, but it is unclear which patients benefit specifically. This study examined efficacy moderators of combined treatment (STPP + antidepressants) v. antidepressants for adults with depression.

METHODS

For this systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42017056029), we searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase.com, and the Cochrane Library from inception to 1 January 2022. We included randomized clinical trials comparing combined treatment (antidepressants + individual outpatient STPP) v. antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of depression in adults. Individual participant data were requested and analyzed combinedly using mixed-effects models (adding Cochrane risk of bias items as covariates) and an exploratory machine learning technique. The primary outcome was post-treatment depression symptom level.

RESULTS

Data were obtained for all seven trials identified (100%, n = 482, combined: n = 238, antidepressants: n = 244). Adding STPP to antidepressants was more efficacious for patients with high rather than low baseline depression levels [B = -0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.61 to -0.37, p < 0.0001] and for patients with a depressive episode duration of >2 years rather than <1 year (B = -0.68, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.05, p = 0.03) and than 1-2 years (B = -0.86, 95% CI -1.66 to -0.06, p = 0.04). Heterogeneity was low. Effects were replicated in analyses controlling for risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first study that examines moderators across trials assessing the addition of STPP to antidepressants. These findings need validation but suggest that depression severity and episode duration are factors to consider when adding STPP to antidepressants and might contribute to personalizing treatment selection for depression.

Identifying depression and its determinants upon initiating treatment: ChatGPT versus primary care physicians

OBJECTIVE

To compare evaluations of depressive episodes and suggested treatment protocols generated by Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (ChatGPT)-3 and ChatGPT-4 with the recommendations of primary care physicians.

METHODS

Vignettes were input to the ChatGPT interface. These vignettes focused primarily on hypothetical patients with symptoms of depression during initial consultations. The creators of these vignettes meticulously designed eight distinct versions in which they systematically varied patient attributes (sex, socioeconomic status (blue collar worker or white collar worker) and depression severity (mild or severe)). Each variant was subsequently introduced into ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4. Each vignette was repeated 10 times to ensure consistency and reliability of the ChatGPT responses.

RESULTS

For mild depression, ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 recommended psychotherapy in 95.0% and 97.5% of cases, respectively. Primary care physicians, however, recommended psychotherapy in only 4.3% of cases. For severe cases, ChatGPT favoured an approach that combined psychotherapy, while primary care physicians recommended a combined approach. The pharmacological recommendations of ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 showed a preference for exclusive use of antidepressants (74% and 68%, respectively), in contrast with primary care physicians, who typically recommended a mix of antidepressants and anxiolytics/hypnotics (67.4%). Unlike primary care physicians, ChatGPT showed no gender or socioeconomic biases in its recommendations.

CONCLUSION

ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 aligned well with accepted guidelines for managing mild and severe depression, without showing the gender or socioeconomic biases observed among primary care physicians. Despite the suggested potential benefit of using atificial intelligence (AI) chatbots like ChatGPT to enhance clinical decision making, further research is needed to refine AI recommendations for severe cases and to consider potential risks and ethical issues.

Psychological treatment of depression: A systematic overview of a 'Meta-Analytic Research Domain'

BACKGROUND

Over the past 16 years, we have developed a 'Meta-analytic Research Domain' (MARD) of all randomized trials of psychological treatments of depression. A MARD is a living systematic review of a research field, that cannot be otherwise covered by one (network) meta-analysis and includes multiple PICOs. In this paper we give an overview of the findings of this MARD.

METHODS

A narrative review of the results of the 118 meta-analyses on psychotherapies for depression that were published within our MARD.

RESULTS

Most research has been conducted on cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), but several other psychotherapies are also effective, with few differences between therapies. They can be effectively delivered in individual, group, telephone and guided self-help format and are effective in many different target groups and across different age groups, although the effects are significantly smaller in children and adolescents. Psychotherapies have comparable effects as pharmacotherapy at the short term but are probably more effective at the longer term. Combined treatment is more effective than either psychotherapy or pharmacotherapy alone at the short, but also at the longer term.

LIMITATIONS

We did not summarize all published meta-analyses (protocols, methodological studies) and have not compared our results to those found in other meta-analyses on comparable subjects.

CONCLUSION

Psychotherapies can contribute considerably to a reduction of the disease burden of depression. MARDs are an important next step in the aggregation of knowledge from randomized controlled trials in psychological treatments of depression as well as in other healthcare sectors.

Psychiatric diagnosis and treatment in the 21st century: paradigm shifts versus incremental integration

Psychiatry has always been characterized by a range of different models of and approaches to mental disorder, which have sometimes brought progress in clinical practice, but have often also been accompanied by critique from within and without the field. Psychiatric nosology has been a particular focus of debate in recent decades; successive editions of the DSM and ICD have strongly influenced both psychiatric practice and research, but have also led to assertions that psychiatry is in crisis, and to advocacy for entirely new paradigms for diagnosis and assessment. When thinking about etiology, many researchers currently refer to a biopsychosocial model, but this approach has received significant critique, being considered by some observers overly eclectic and vague. Despite the development of a range of evidence-based pharmacotherapies and psychotherapies, current evidence points to both a treatment gap and a research-practice gap in mental health. In this paper, after considering current clinical practice, we discuss some proposed novel perspectives that have recently achieved particular prominence and may significantly impact psychiatric practice and research in the future: clinical neuroscience and personalized pharmacotherapy; novel statistical approaches to psychiatric nosology, assessment and research; deinstitutionalization and community mental health care; the scale-up of evidence-based psychotherapy; digital phenotyping and digital therapies; and global mental health and task-sharing approaches. We consider the extent to which proposed transitions from current practices to novel approaches reflect hype or hope. Our review indicates that each of the novel perspectives contributes important insights that allow hope for the future, but also that each provides only a partial view, and that any promise of a paradigm shift for the field is not well grounded. We conclude that there have been crucial advances in psychiatric diagnosis and treatment in recent decades; that, despite this important progress, there is considerable need for further improvements in assessment and intervention; and that such improvements will likely not be achieved by any specific paradigm shifts in psychiatric practice and research, but rather by incremental progress and iterative integration.

A Psychoanalytic-Derived Brief Psychotherapeutic Approach in the Treatment of Major Depression: Monotherapy Studies

Over the years, short term psychodynamic therapy (STPP) has been broadly researched in order to evaluate its efficacy in the treatment of major psychiatric disorders. In particular, a consistent number of studies focused on assessing clinical outcomes of the principal psychodynamic techniques in treating depressive disorders. We conducted a narrative review in which we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of STPP in monotherapy in major depressive disorder and to assess possible features that may correlate with its clinical use. Databases searched were PubMed, Ovid, Scopus, PsycINFO and Cochrane Libraries from inception to July 2022. Our research underlined that STPP in monotherapy is particularly effective in moderately severe depression and in preventing depressive relapses. Moreover, a case-by-case evaluation of its efficacy should be performed when considering STPP for the treatment of major depression with other comorbid psychiatric conditions. Although such key points emerged from scientific evidence, STPP should be better studied in the long-term perspective; further research is needed to define the clinical scenarios in which STPP can be considered a first-line approach as monotherapy in major depressive disorder compared to medications or other types of psychotherapy.

Efficacy and moderators of cognitive therapy versus behavioural activation for adults with depression: study protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

Cognitive therapy and behavioural activation are both widely applied and effective psychotherapies for depression, but it is unclear which works best for whom. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis allows for examining moderators at the participant level and can provide more precise effect estimates than conventional meta-analysis, which is based on study-level data.

AIMS

This article describes the protocol for a systematic review and IPD meta-analysis that aims to compare the efficacy of cognitive therapy and behavioural activation for adults with depression, and to explore moderators of treatment effect. (PROSPERO: CRD42022341602).

METHOD

Systematic literature searches will be conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library, to identify randomised clinical trials comparing cognitive therapy and behavioural activation for adult acute-phase depression. Investigators of these trials will be invited to share their participant-level data. One-stage IPD meta-analyses will be conducted with mixed-effects models to assess treatment effects and to examine various available demographic, clinical and psychological participant characteristics as potential moderators. The primary outcome measure will be depressive symptom level at treatment completion. Secondary outcomes will include post-treatment anxiety, interpersonal functioning and quality of life, as well as follow-up outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

To the best of our knowledge, this will be the first IPD meta-analysis concerning cognitive therapy versus behavioural activation for adult depression. This study has the potential to enhance our knowledge of depression treatment by using state-of-the-art statistical techniques to compare the efficacy of two widely used psychotherapies, and by shedding more light on which of these treatments might work best for whom.

The combined effect of psychodynamic psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy on healthcare cost

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies have established a connection between therapy and healthcare cost: an increase in cost prior to therapy and a maintained decrease post therapy. There is, however, a lack of studies examining the combined effects of psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy on healthcare cost.

METHOD

Healthcare cost was examined quarterly in 1,213 patients (28,776 observations) in a naturalistic longitudinal design. Psychotherapy only was compared to combined treatment and to an addition of psychotherapy to preexisting pharmacotherapy. The comparisons were conducted with a multilevel piecewise model (LMLM) computed for three phases: pre-, during-, and post-therapy.

RESULTS

Significant interactions were found between the contrast comparing preexisting pharmacotherapy to the during-psychotherapy and no-pharmacotherapy groups and the three piecewise variables. The pre-therapy increase was larger for the preexisting-pharmacotherapy group than for the other groups. The during-therapy decrease was larger for the preexisting-pharmacotherapy group than for the other groups. In the post-therapy period, the increase was significant only for the prior-psychiatric-medication group.

CONCLUSIONS

Preexisting psychotropic treatment along with an increase in healthcare expenditure may serve as an indication of the need for additional psychotherapy treatment.

The efficacy of psychotherapies and pharmacotherapies for mental disorders in adults: an umbrella review and meta-analytic evaluation of recent meta-analyses

Mental disorders represent a worldwide public health concern. Psychotherapies and pharmacotherapies are recommended as first line treatments. However, evidence has emerged that their efficacy may be overestimated, due to a variety of shortcomings in clinical trials (e.g., publication bias, weak control conditions such as waiting list). We performed an umbrella review of recent meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of psychotherapies and pharmacotherapies for the main mental disorders in adults. We selected meta-analyses that formally assessed risk of bias or quality of studies, excluded weak comparators, and used effect sizes for target symptoms as primary outcome. We searched PubMed and PsycINFO and individual records of the Cochrane Library for meta-analyses published between January 2014 and March 2021 comparing psychotherapies or pharmacotherapies with placebo or treatment-as-usual (TAU), or psychotherapies vs. pharmacotherapies head-to-head, or the combination of psychotherapy with pharmacotherapy to either monotherapy. One hundred and two meta-analyses, encompassing 3,782 RCTs and 650,514 patients, were included, covering depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, somatoform disorders, eating disorders, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, substance use disorders, insomnia, schizophrenia spectrum disorders, and bipolar disorder. Across disorders and treatments, the majority of effect sizes for target symptoms were small. A random effect meta-analytic evaluation of the effect sizes reported by the largest meta-analyses per disorder yielded a standardized mean difference (SMD) of 0.34 (95% CI: 0.26-0.42) for psychotherapies and 0.36 (95% CI: 0.32-0.41) for pharmacotherapies compared with placebo or TAU. The SMD for head-to-head comparisons of psychotherapies vs. pharmacotherapies was 0.11 (95% CI: -0.05 to 0.26). The SMD for the combined treatment compared with either monotherapy was 0.31 (95% CI: 0.19-0.44). Risk of bias was often high. After more than half a century of research, thousands of RCTs and millions of invested funds, the effect sizes of psychotherapies and pharmacotherapies for mental disorders are limited, suggesting a ceiling effect for treatment research as presently conducted. A paradigm shift in research seems to be required to achieve further progress.

The Contribution of “Individual Participant Data” Meta-Analyses of Psychotherapies for Depression to the Development of Personalized Treatments: A Systematic Review

While randomized trials typically lack sufficient statistical power to identify predictors and moderators of outcome, ”individual participant data” (IPD) meta-analyses, which combine primary data of multiple randomized trials, can increase the statistical power to identify predictors and moderators of outcome. We conducted a systematic review of IPD meta-analyses on psychological treatments of depression to provide an overview of predictors and moderators identified. We included 10 (eight pairwise and two network) IPD meta-analyses. Six meta-analyses showed that higher baseline depression severity was associated with better outcomes, and two found that older age was associated with better outcomes. Because power was high in most IPD meta-analyses, non-significant findings are also of interest because they indicate that these variables are probably not relevant as predictors and moderators. We did not find in any IPD meta-analysis that gender, education level, or relationship status were significant predictors or moderators. This review shows that IPD meta-analyses on psychological treatments can identify predictors and moderators of treatment effects and thereby contribute considerably to the development of personalized treatments of depression.

Short-Term Psychodynamic Psychotherapy for Depression: For Whom Does It Work? A Research Perspective

Short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (STPP) is an empirically supported treatment for depression that is frequently applied in clinical practice. However, it remains largely unclear which patients can benefit specifically from STPP for depression, because studies often have small sample sizes and, therefore, lack statistical power to examine patient characteristics associated with differential treatment efficacy. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses, which combine patient-level data from multiple studies, can help overcome this obstacle. Currently, the first IPD meta-analysis project regarding STPP for depression is being conducted. We describe this project, its progress, and first findings.

Individual participant data systematic reviews with meta-analyses of psychotherapies for borderline personality disorder

INTRODUCTION

The heterogeneity in people with borderline personality disorder (BPD) and the range of specialised psychotherapies means that people with certain BPD characteristics might benefit more or less from different types of psychotherapy. Identifying moderating characteristics of individuals is a key to refine and tailor standard treatments so they match the specificities of the individual participant. The objective of this is to improve the quality of care and the individual outcomes. We will do so by performing three systematic reviews with meta-analyses of individual participant data (IPD). The aim of these reviews is to investigate potential predictors and moderating patient characteristics on treatment outcomes for patients with BPD.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We performed comprehensive searches in 22 databases and trial registries up to October 6th 2020. These will be updated with a top-up search up until June 2021. Our primary meta-analytic method will be the one-stage random-effects approach. To identify predictors, we will use the one-stage model that accounts for interaction between covariates and treatment allocation. Heterogeneity in case-mix will be assessed with a membership model based on a multinomial logistic regression where study membership is the outcome. A random-effects meta-analysis is chosen to account for expected levels of heterogeneity.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The statistical analyses will be conducted on anonymised data that have already been approved by the respective ethical committees that originally assessed the included trials. The three IPD reviews will be published in high-impact factor journals and their results will be presented at international conferences and national seminars.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021210688.

Effekte der Kombinationstherapie bei Depression: Ergebnisse eines Reviews

Depression ist eine weit verbreitete psychische Erkrankung, die mit erheblichen persönlichen und gesellschaftlichen Kosten verbunden ist. Antidepressiva und Psychotherapien stellen die dominierenden Behandlungsformen dar. Tradition hat in diesem Kontext die Psychodynamische Kurzzeittherapie (short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy, STPP), für die in Metastuien z. T. große Behandlungseffekte gefunden wurden.

The efficacy of antidepressant medication and interpersonal psychotherapy for adult acute-phase depression: study protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

Antidepressant medication and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) are both recommended interventions in depression treatment guidelines based on literature reviews and meta-analyses. However, 'conventional' meta-analyses comparing their efficacy are limited by their reliance on reported study-level information and a narrow focus on depression outcome measures assessed at treatment completion. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis, considered the gold standard in evidence synthesis, can improve the quality of the analyses when compared with conventional meta-analysis.

AIMS

We describe the protocol for a systematic review and IPD meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of antidepressants and IPT for adult acute-phase depression across a range of outcome measures, including depressive symptom severity as well as functioning and well-being, at both post-treatment and follow-up (PROSPERO: CRD42020219891).

METHOD

We will conduct a systematic literature search in PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify randomised clinical trials comparing antidepressants and IPT in the acute-phase treatment of adults with depression. We will invite the authors of these studies to share the participant-level data of their trials. One-stage IPD meta-analyses will be conducted using mixed-effects models to assess treatment effects at post-treatment and follow-up for all outcome measures that are assessed in at least two studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This will be the first IPD meta-analysis examining antidepressants versus IPT efficacy. This study has the potential to enhance our knowledge of depression treatment by comparing the short- and long-term effects of two widely used interventions across a range of outcome measures using state-of-the-art statistical techniques.

Fluoxetine regulates eEF2 activity (phosphorylation) via HDAC1 inhibitory mechanism in an LPS-induced mouse model of depression

BACKGROUND

Selective serotonin reuptaker inhibitors, including fluoxetine, are widely studied and prescribed antidepressants, while their exact molecular and cellular mechanism are yet to be defined. We investigated the involvement of HDAC1 and eEF2 in the antidepressant mechanisms of fluoxetine using a lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced depression-like behavior model.

METHODS

For in vivo analysis, mice were treated with LPS (2 mg/kg BW), fluoxetine (20 mg/kg BW), HDAC1 activator (Exifone: 54 mg/kg BW) and NH125 (1 mg/kg BW). Depressive-like behaviors were confirmed via behavior tests including OFT, FST, SPT, and TST. Cytokines were measured by ELISA while Iba-1 and GFAP expression were determined by immunofluorescence. Further, the desired gene expression was measured by immunoblotting. For in vitro analysis, BV2 cell lines were cultured; treated with LPS, exifone, and fluoxetine; collected; and analyzed.

RESULTS

Mice treated with LPS displayed depression-like behaviors, pronounced neuroinflammation, increased HDAC1 expression, and reduced eEF2 activity, as accompanied by altered synaptogenic factors including BDNF, SNAP25, and PSD95. Fluoxetine treatment exhibited antidepressant effects and ameliorated the molecular changes induced by LPS. Exifone, a selective HDAC1 activator, reversed the antidepressant and anti-inflammatory effects of fluoxetine both in vivo and in vitro, supporting a causing role of HDAC1 in neuroinflammation allied depression. Further molecular mechanisms underlying HDAC1 were explored with NH125, an eEF2K inhibitor, whose treatment reduced immobility time, altered pro-inflammatory cytokines, and NLRP3 expression. Moreover, NH125 treatment enhanced eEF2 and GSK3β activities, BDNF, SNAP25, and PSD95 expression, but had no effects on HDAC1.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results showed that the antidepressant effects of fluoxetine may involve HDAC1-eEF2 related neuroinflammation and synaptogenesis.

The 2020 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders

OBJECTIVES

To provide advice and guidance regarding the management of mood disorders, derived from scientific evidence and supplemented by expert clinical consensus to formulate s that maximise clinical utility.

METHODS

Articles and information sourced from search engines including PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Google Scholar were supplemented by literature known to the mood disorders committee (e.g. books, book chapters and government reports) and from published depression and bipolar disorder guidelines. Relevant information was appraised and discussed in detail by members of the mood disorders committee, with a view to formulating and developing consensus-based recommendations and clinical guidance. The guidelines were subjected to rigorous consultation and external review involving: expert and clinical advisors, key stakeholders, professional bodies and specialist groups with interest in mood disorders.

RESULTS

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists mood disorders clinical practice guidelines 2020 (MDcpg²⁰²⁰) provide up-to-date guidance regarding the management of mood disorders that is informed by evidence and clinical experience. The guideline is intended for clinical use by psychiatrists, psychologists, primary care physicians and others with an interest in mental health care.

CONCLUSION

The MDcpg²⁰²⁰ builds on the previous 2015 guidelines and maintains its joint focus on both depressive and bipolar disorders. It provides up-to-date recommendations and guidance within an evidence-based framework, supplemented by expert clinical consensus.

MOOD DISORDERS COMMITTEE

Gin S Malhi (Chair), Erica Bell, Darryl Bassett, Philip Boyce, Richard Bryant, Philip Hazell, Malcolm Hopwood, Bill Lyndon, Roger Mulder, Richard Porter, Ajeet B Singh and Greg Murray.