Systematic scoping review identifies heterogeneity in outcomes measured in adolescent depression clinical trials

Review of clinical trials and guidelines for children and youth with mucopolysaccharidosis: outcome selection and measurement

BACKGROUND

To inform the development of a core outcome set (COS) for children and youth with mucopolysaccharidoses (MPS), we aimed to identify all outcomes and associated outcome measurement instruments that are reported in recent clinical trials and recommended as measurements in clinical management guidelines.

METHODS

To identify English-language clinical trials and guidelines pertaining to MPS published between 2011 and mid-2021, we applied a comprehensive peer-reviewed search strategy to relevant databases and registers on May 16, 2021. Two reviewers independently screened retrieved citations and then full-text articles to determine eligibility for inclusion. From articles meeting inclusion criteria, we extracted details of the study design, population, intervention, and comparator, along with verbatim outcomes and associated outcome measurement instruments. Outcomes were organized into domains within five a priori core areas: life impact, pathophysiological manifestations, growth and development, resource use, and death. We conducted descriptive analyses at the study level, grouping articles arising from the same study.

RESULTS

From 2593 unique citations, 73 articles from 61 unique studies were included in the review, pertaining to all MPS subtypes except for exceptionally rare subtypes. Eighty-four unique outcomes were reported across the studies, 33 (39%) of which were reported by three or fewer studies. Most outcomes (55; 65%) were in the pathophysiological manifestations core area, followed by life impact (17; 20%) and growth and development (10; 12%); one outcome each pertained to resource use and death. The most frequently reported outcomes were general adverse events (45; 74%), immune-related adverse events (39; 64%), and urinary glycosaminoglycans (38; 62%). Substantial variability existed in the reporting of outcome measurement instruments. Some differences in outcome reporting were observed by MPS subtype and publication year.

DISCUSSION

Outcomes reported in clinical trials and guidelines for MPS in children and youth vary considerably and largely focus on pathophysiological manifestations. A COS is needed to standardize the selection and measurement of meaningful outcomes across future studies. We will present the outcomes identified in this review to knowledge users as part of a consensus process to select the most critical outcomes for inclusion in the COS. Trial Registration The protocol for this study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021267531) and in the COMET Database.

Systematic Review: Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Used to Measure Depression Symptom Severity in Adolescents With Depression

OBJECTIVE

To systematically evaluate the measurement properties of 12 patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to measure depression symptom severity in adolescents with depression. Depression symptom severity was chosen as the outcome of focus given its importance as an outcome to measure in adolescents with depression across clinical trials and/or care.

METHOD

MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched from year of inception up to December 7, 2023. Study appraisal (ie, risk of bias), evaluation of measurement properties, and evidence synthesis followed the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines. Included studies evaluated at least 1 of 9 measurement properties as detailed in the COSMIN taxonomy within a reported sample or subgroup of youth ages 12 to 24 years, with at least 40% meeting criteria for any depressive disorder.

RESULTS

Of the 15,560 records identified, 31 studies for 7 PROMs were included in the COSMIN appraisal. Although several PROMs have the potential to accurately measure depression symptom severity in adolescents with depression, at this time none of the PROMs can be recommended for use without further evaluative work. High-quality evidence was generally lacking, largely due to few or inconsistent findings, small sample sizes, and other methodological concerns.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review of the measurement properties of 12 PROMs used to measure depression symptom severity in adolescents with depression found that none of the PROMs can be recommended for use until further evaluative work is conducted. Clinicians and researchers should proceed with caution when using these PROMs.

DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION STATEMENT

One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science. One or more of the authors of this paper self-identifies as a member of one or more historically underrepresented sexual and/or gender groups in science. We actively worked to promote sex and gender balance in our author group. We actively worked to promote inclusion of historically underrepresented racial and/or ethnic groups in science in our author group. The author list of this paper includes contributors from the location and/or community where the research was conducted who participated in the data collection, design, analysis, and/or interpretation of the work.

Heterogeneity of outcome measures in depression trials and the relevance of the content of outcome measures to patients: a systematic review

Research waste occurs when randomised controlled trial (RCT) outcomes are heterogeneous or overlook domains that matter to patients (eg, relating to symptoms or functions). In this systematic review, we reviewed the outcome measures used in 450 RCTs of adult unipolar and bipolar depression registered between 2018 and 2022 and identified 388 different measures. 40% of the RCTs used the same measure (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAMD]). Patients and clinicians matched each item within the 25 most frequently used measures with 80 previously identified domains of depression that matter to patients. Seven (9%) domains were not covered by the 25 most frequently used outcome measures (eg, mental pain and irritability). The HAMD covered a maximum of 47 (59%) of the 80 domains that matter to patients. An interim solution to facilitate evidence synthesis before a core outcome set is developed would be to use the most common measures and choose complementary scales to optimise domain coverage. TRANSLATIONS: For the French and Dutch translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

A comparison of the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural interventions based on delivery features for elevated symptoms of depression in adolescents: A systematic review

Background

Depression is a public health problem and common amongst adolescents. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is widely used to treat adolescent depression but existing research does not provide clear conclusions regarding the relative effectiveness of different delivery modalities.

Objectives

The primary aim is to estimate the relative efficacy of different modes of CBT delivery compared with each other and control conditions for reducing depressive symptoms in adolescents. The secondary aim is to compare the different modes of delivery with regard to intervention completion/attrition (a proxy for intervention acceptability).

Search Methods

The Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Clinical Trials Register was searched in April 2020. MEDLINE, PsycInfo, EMBASE, four other electronic databases, the CENTRAL trial registry, Google Scholar and Google were searched in November 2020, together with reference checking, citation searching and hand-searching of two databases.

Selection Criteria

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of CBT interventions (irrespective of delivery mode) to reduce symptoms of depression in young people aged 10-19 years with clinically relevant symptoms or diagnosis of depression were included.

Data Collection and Analysis

Screening and data extraction were completed by two authors independently, with discrepancies addressed by a third author. CBT interventions were categorised as follows: group CBT, individual CBT, remote CBT, guided self-help, and unguided self-help. Effect on depressive symptom score was estimated across validated self-report measures using Hedges' g standardised mean difference. Acceptability was estimated based on loss to follow-up as an odds ratio. Treatment rankings were developed using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). Pairwise meta-analyses were conducted using random effects models where there were two or more head-to-head trials. Network analyses were conducted using random effects models.

Main Results

Sixty-eight studies were included in the review. The mean age of participants ranged from 10 to 19.5 years, and on average 60% of participants were female. The majority of studies were conducted in schools (28) or universities (6); other settings included primary care, clinical settings and the home. The number of CBT sessions ranged from 1 to 16, the frequency of delivery from once every 2 weeks to twice a week and the duration of each session from 20 min to 2 h. The risk of bias was low across all domains for 23 studies, 24 studies had some concerns and the remaining 21 were assessed to be at high risk of bias. Sixty-two RCTs (representing 6435 participants) were included in the pairwise and network meta-analyses for post-intervention depressive symptom score at post-intervention. All pre-specified treatment and control categories were represented by at least one RCT. Although most CBT approaches, except remote CBT, demonstrated superiority over no intervention, no approaches performed clearly better than or equivalent to another. The highest and lowest ranking interventions were guided self-help (SUCRA 83%) and unguided self-help (SUCRA 51%), respectively (very low certainty in treatment ranking). Nineteen RCTs (3260 participants) were included in the pairwise and network meta-analyses for 6 to 12 month follow-up depressive symptom score. Neither guided self-help nor remote CBT were evaluated in the RCTs for this time point. Effects were generally attenuated for 6- to 12-month outcomes compared to posttest. No interventions demonstrated superiority to no intervention, although unguided self-help and group CBT both demonstrated superiority compared to TAU. No CBT approach demonstrated clear superiority over another. The highest and lowest ranking approaches were unguided self-help and individual CBT, respectively. Sixty-two RCTs (7347 participants) were included in the pairwise and network meta-analyses for intervention acceptability. All pre-specified treatment and control categories were represented by at least one RCT. Although point estimates tended to favour no intervention, no active treatments were clearly inferior. No CBT approach demonstrated clear superiority over another. The highest and lowest ranking active interventions were individual CBT and group CBT respectively. Pairwise meta-analytic findings were similar to those of the network meta-analysis for all analyses. There may be age-based subgroup effects on post-intervention depressive symptoms. Using the no intervention control group as the reference, the magnitudes of effects appear to be larger for the oldest age categories compared to the other subgroups for each given comparison. However, they were generally less precise and formal testing only indicated a significant difference for group CBT. Findings were robust to pre-specified sensitivity analyses separating out the type of placebo and excluding cluster-RCTs, as well as an additional analysis excluding studies where we had imputed standard deviations.

Authors' Conclusions

At posttreatment, all active treatments (group CBT, individual CBT, guided self-help, and unguided self-help) except for remote CBT were more effective than no treatment. Guided self-help was the most highly ranked intervention but only evaluated in trials with the oldest adolescents (16-19 years). Moreover, the studies of guided self-help vary in the type and amount of therapist support provided and longer-term results are needed to determine whether effects persist. The magnitude of effects was generally attenuated for 6- to 12-month outcomes. Although unguided self-help was the lowest-ranked active intervention at post-intervention, it was the highest ranked at follow-up. This suggests the need for further research into whether interventions with self-directed elements enable young people to maintain effects by continuing or revisiting the intervention independently, and whether therapist support would improve long-term outcomes. There was no clear evidence that any active treatments were more acceptable to participants than any others. The relative effectiveness of intervention delivery modes must be taken into account in the context of the needs and preferences of individual young people, particularly as the differences between effect sizes were relatively small. Further research into the type and amount of therapist support that is most acceptable to young people and most cost-effective would be particularly useful.

What treatment outcomes matter in adolescent depression? A Q-study of priority profiles among mental health practitioners in the UK and Chile

Evidence-based and person-centred care requires the measurement of treatment outcomes that matter to youth and mental health practitioners. Priorities, however, may vary not just between but also within stakeholder groups. This study used Q-methodology to explore differences in outcome priorities among mental health practitioners from two countries in relation to youth depression. Practitioners from the United Kingdom (UK) (n = 27) and Chile (n = 15) sorted 35 outcome descriptions by importance and completed brief semi-structured interviews about their sorting rationale. By-person principal component analysis (PCA) served to identify distinct priority profiles within each country sample; second-order PCA examined whether these profiles could be further reduced into cross-cultural "super profiles". We identified three UK outcome priority profiles (Reduced symptoms and enhanced well-being; improved individual coping and self-management; improved family coping and support), and two Chilean profiles (Strengthened identity and enhanced insight; symptom reduction and self-management). These could be further reduced into two cross-cultural super profiles: one prioritized outcomes related to reduced depressive symptoms and enhanced well-being; the other prioritized outcomes related to improved resilience resources within youth and families. A practitioner focus on symptom reduction aligns with a long-standing focus on symptomatic change in youth depression treatment studies, and with recent measurement recommendations. Less data and guidance are available to those practitioners who prioritize resilience outcomes. To raise the chances that such practitioners will engage in evidence-based practice and measurement-based care, measurement guidance for a broader set of outcomes may be needed.

What Do We Know About Depression Among Youth and How Can We Make Progress Toward Improved Understanding and Reducing Distress? A New Hope

This paper summarizes many findings about depression among children and adolescents. Depression is prevalent, highly distressing, and exerts considerable burden worldwide. Rates surge from childhood through young adulthood and have increased over the last decade. Many risk factors have been identified, and evidence-based interventions exist targeting mostly individual-level changes via psychological or pharmacological means. At the same time, the field appears stuck and has not achieved considerable progress in advancing scientific understanding of depression's features or delivering interventions to meet the challenge of youth depression's high and growing prevalence. This paper adopts several positions to address these challenges and move the field forward. First, we emphasize reinvigoration of construct validation approaches that may better characterize youth depression's phenomenological features and inform more valid and reliable assessments that can enhance scientific understanding and improve interventions for youth depression. To this end, history and philosophical principles affecting depression's conceptualization and measurement are considered. Second, we suggest expanding the range and targets of treatments and prevention efforts beyond current practice guidelines for evidence-based interventions. This broader suite of interventions includes structural- and system-level change focused at community and societal levels (e.g., evidence-based economic anti-poverty interventions) and personalized interventions with sufficient evidence base. We propose that by focusing on the FORCE (Fundamentals, Openness, Relationships, Constructs, Evidence), youth depression research can provide new hope.

Outcomes and outcome measurement instruments reported in randomised controlled trials of anxiety disorder treatments in children and adolescents: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Paediatric anxiety disorders (AD) are prevalent and persistent mental health conditions worldwide affecting between 10% and 20% of children and adolescents. Despite the high prevalence of paediatric AD, there is limited understanding of which treatments work best. Outcome heterogeneity across paediatric mental health trials has been a significant factor in hindering the ability to compare results and assess the efficacy of such trials. This scoping review will help to identify and synthesise the outcomes reported in paediatric AD trials to date.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Following the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology, a comprehensive electronic bibliographic database search (MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL) strategy will be applied to identify articles examining interventions for children diagnosed with an AD. Articles will be eligible for inclusion if they assess at least one AD intervention (eg, psychological), in children 4-18 years of age inclusive. Initial title and abstract screening will be completed by two trained reviewers independently and in duplicate. Full-text screening of each included article will be completed independently and in duplicate by two of three trained reviewers. Identified outcomes will be mapped to a standard outcome taxonomy developed for core outcome sets. Trial and outcome characteristics will be synthesised using quantitative metrics (counts and frequencies).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

As this is a scoping review of the literature and patient information or records were not accessed, institutional ethics approval was not required. Results of this scoping review will be disseminated to clinicians, researchers inclusive of trialists and other stakeholders invested in outcome selection, measurement and reporting in paediatric AD trials. In addition, scoping review results will inform the development of a Core Outcome Set for paediatric AD trials-a minimum set of outcomes that should be measured across trials in an area of health, without precluding the inclusion of other outcomes.

Study protocol for developing, piloting and disseminating the PRISMA-COSMIN guideline: a new reporting guideline for systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments are important tools in the evidence-based selection of these instruments. COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) has developed a comprehensive and widespread guideline to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments, but key information is often missing in published reviews. This hinders the appraisal of the quality of outcome measurement instruments, impacts the decisions of knowledge users regarding their appropriateness, and compromises reproducibility and interpretability of the reviews' findings. To facilitate sufficient, transparent, and consistent reporting of systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments, an extension of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting of Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guideline will be developed: the PRISMA-COSMIN guideline.

METHODS

The PRISMA-COSMIN guideline will be developed in accordance with recommendations for reporting guideline development from the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network. First, a candidate reporting item list will be created through an environmental literature scan and expert consultations. Second, an international Delphi study will be conducted with systematic review authors, biostatisticians, epidemiologists, psychometricians/clinimetricians, reporting guideline developers, journal editors as well as patients, caregivers, and members of the public. Delphi panelists will rate candidate items for inclusion on a 5-point scale, suggest additional candidate items, and give feedback on item wording and comprehensibility. Third, the draft PRISMA-COSMIN guideline and user manual will be iteratively piloted by applying it to systematic reviews in several disease areas to assess its relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility, along with usability and user satisfaction. Fourth, a consensus meeting will be held to finalize the PRISMA-COSMIN guideline through roundtable discussions and voting. Last, a user manual will be developed and the final PRISMA-COSMIN guideline will be disseminated through publications, conferences, newsletters, and relevant websites. Additionally, relevant journals and organizations will be invited to endorse and implement PRISMA-COSMIN. Throughout the project, evaluations will take place to identify barriers and facilitators of involving patient/public partners and employing a virtual process.

DISCUSSION

The PRISMA-COSMIN guideline will ensure that the reports of systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments are complete and informative, enhancing their reproducibility, ease of use, and uptake.

Revisiting the theoretical and methodological foundations of depression measurement

Depressive disorders are among the leading causes of global disease burden, but there has been limited progress in understanding the causes and treatments for these disorders. In this Perspective, we suggest that such progress crucially depends on our ability to measure depression. We review the many problems with depression measurement, including limited evidence of validity and reliability. These issues raise grave concerns about common uses of depression measures, such as diagnosis or tracking treatment progress. We argue that shortcomings arise because depression measurement rests on shaky methodological and theoretical foundations. Moving forward, we need to break with the field's tradition that has, for decades, divorced theories about depression from how we measure it. Instead, we suggest that epistemic iteration, an iterative exchange between theory and measurement, provides a crucial avenue for depression measurement to progress.

Measurement practices in hallucinations research

Introduction: In several sub-fields of psychology, there has been a renewed focus on measurement practices. As far as we are aware, this has been absent in hallucinations research. Thus, we investigated (a) cross-study variation in how hallucinatory experiences are measured and (b) the reliability of measurements obtained using two tasks that are widely employed in hallucinations research.Method: In Study 1, we investigated to what extent there was variation in how the Launay-Slade Hallucination Scale (LSHS) has been used across 100 studies. In Study 2, we investigated the reliability of the measurements obtained through source monitoring and signal detection tasks, using data from four recent publications. Materials/data are available at doi: 10.17605/osf.io/d3gnk/.Results: In Study 1, we found substantial variation in how hallucinatory experiences were assessed using the LSHS and that descriptions of the LSHS were often incomplete in important ways. In Study 2, we reported a range of reliability estimates for the measurements obtained using source monitoring and signal discrimination tasks. Some measurements obtained using source monitoring tasks had unacceptably low levels of reliability.Conclusions: Our findings suggest that suboptimal measurement practices are common in hallucinations research and we suggest steps researchers could take to improve measurement practices.

Adolescent depression beyond DSM definition: a network analysis

Calls for refining the understanding of depression beyond diagnostic criteria have been growing in recent years. We examined the prevalence and relevance of DSM and non-DSM depressive symptoms in two Brazilian school-based adolescent samples with two commonly used scales, the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-A) and the Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ). We analyzed cross-sectional data from two similarly recruited samples of adolescents aged 14-16 years, as part of the Identifying Depression Early in Adolescence (IDEA) study in Brazil. We assessed dimensional depressive symptomatology using the PHQ-A in the first sample (n = 7720) and the MFQ in the second sample (n = 1070). We conducted network analyses to study symptom structure and centrality estimates of the two scales. Additionally, we compared centrality of items included (e.g., low mood, anhedonia) and not included in the DSM (e.g., low self-esteem, loneliness) in the MFQ. Sad mood and worthlessness items were the most central items in the network structure of the PHQ-A. In the MFQ sample, self-hatred and loneliness, two non-DSM features, were the most central items and DSM and non-DSM items in this scale formed a highly interconnected network of symptoms. Furthermore, analysis of the MFQ sample revealed DSM items not to be more frequent, severe or interconnected than non-DSM items, but rather part of a larger network of symptoms. A focus on symptoms might advance research on adolescent depression by enhancing our understanding of the disorder.

The challenge of ensuring affordability, sustainability, consistency, and adaptability in the common metrics agenda

Mental health research grapples with research waste and stunted field progression caused by inconsistent outcome measurement across studies and clinical settings, which means there is no common language for considering findings. Although recognising that no gold standard measures exist and that all existing measures are flawed in one way or another, anxiety and depression research is spearheading a common metrics movement to harmonise measurement, with several initiatives over the past 5 years recommending the consistent use of specific scales to allow read-across of measurements between studies. For this approach to flourish, however, common metrics must be acceptable and adaptable to a range of contexts and populations, and global access should be as easy and affordable as possible, including in low-income countries. Within a measurement landscape dominated by fixed proprietary measures and with competing views of what should be measured, achieving this goal poses a range of challenges. In this Personal View, we consider tensions between affordability, sustainability, consistency, and adaptability that, if not addressed, risk undermining the common metrics agenda. We outline a three-pronged way forward that involves funders taking more direct responsibility for measure development and dissemination; a move towards managing measure dissemination and adaptation via open-access measure hubs; and transitioning from fixed questionnaires to item banks. We argue that now is the time to start thinking of mental health metrics as 21st century tools to be co-owned and co-created by the mental health community, with support from dedicated infrastructure, coordinating bodies, and funders.

Outcomes frequently specified in Cochrane reviews of community-based psychosocial interventions for adults with severe mental illness: A systematic search and narrative synthesis

Background

Outcome selection in intervention studies is a critical issue for synthesizing evidence. This study is aimed to investigate outcomes used in Cochrane reviews assessing community‐based psychosocial interventions for adults with severe mental illness.

Methods

Cochrane reviews that evaluated a community‐based psychosocial intervention for adults with severe mental illness were searched electronically and manually. We extracted all outcomes specified in the Methods section in each Cochrane review. Outcomes that represent the same concept and context were synthesized into an outcome term. Outcome terms were categorized according to the existing taxonomy.

Results

We included 33 Cochrane reviews. Of the 216 outcome terms identified, 13 were used in more than half of the reviews: quality of life, mental state, admission to hospital, economic outcome, leaving the study early, social functioning, satisfaction, global state, relapse, adverse events/effects, carer satisfaction, employment, and duration of admission. Most outcome terms were categorized into the life impact core area (55%), followed by the resource use area (21%).

Conclusions

Our study provides a candidate outcome list for developing a core outcome set for severe mental illness and offers a basis for comparison for future outcome investigation on mental health research.

Two hundred and sixteen outcome terms were found by investigating all the outcomes used in 33 Cochrane reviews assessing community‐based psychosocial interventions for adults with severe mental illness. Thirteen outcome terms were used in more than half of the reviews: quality of life, mental state, admission to hospital, economic outcome, leaving the study early, social functioning, satisfaction, global state, relapse, adverse events/effects, carer satisfaction, employment, and duration of admission.

Forks in the road: Definitions of response, remission, recovery, and other dichotomized outcomes in randomized controlled trials for adolescent depression. A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Definitions of dichotomous outcome terms, such as "response," "remission," and "recovery" are central to the design, interpretation, and clinical application of randomized controlled trials of adolescent depression interventions. Accordingly, this scoping review was conducted to document how these terms have been defined and justified in clinical trials.

METHOD

Bibliographic databases MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo, and CINAHL were searched from inception to February 2020 for randomized controlled trials evaluating treatments for adolescent depression. Ninety-eight trials were included for data extraction and analysis.

RESULTS

Assessment of outcome measurement instruments, metric strategies, methods of aggregation, and measurement timing, yielded 53 unique outcome definitions of "response" across 45 trials that assessed response, 47 unique definitions of "remission" in 29 trials that assessed remission, and 19 unique definitions of "recovery" across 11 trials that assessed recovery. A minority of trials (N = 35) provided a rationale for dichotomous outcomes definitions, often by citing other studies that used a similar definition (N = 11). No rationale included input from youth or families with lived experience.

CONCLUSION

Our review revealed that definitions of "response," "remission," "recovery," and related terms are highly variable, lack clear rationales, and are not informed by key stakeholder input. These limitations impair pooling of trial results and the incorporation of trial findings into pragmatic treatment decisions in clinical practice. Systematic approaches to establishing outcome definitions are needed to enhance the impact of trials examining adolescent depression treatment.

Outcomes reported in randomised controlled trials of major depressive disorder in older adults: protocol for a methodological review

INTRODUCTION

Major depressive disorder (MDD or depression) is prevalent among adults aged 65 years and older. The effectiveness and safety of interventions used to treat depression is often assessed through randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, heterogeneity in the selection, measurement and reporting of outcomes in RCTs renders comparisons between trial results, interpretability and generalisability of findings challenging. There is presently no core outcome set (COS) for use in RCTs that assess interventions for older adults with MDD. We will conduct a methodological review of the literature for outcomes reported in trials for adults 65 years and older with depression to assess the heterogeneity of outcome measures.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

RCTs evaluating pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy, or any other treatment intervention for older adults with MDD published in the last 10 years will be located using electronic database searches (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials). Reviewers will conduct title and abstract screening, full-text screening and data extraction of trials eligible for inclusion independently and in duplicate. Outcomes will be synthesised and mapped to core outcome-domain frameworks. We will summarise characteristics associated with trials and outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

We hope that findings from our methodological review will reduce variability in outcome selection, measurement and reporting and facilitate the development of a COS for older adults with MDD. Our review will also inform evidence synthesis efforts in identifying the best treatment practices for this clinical population. Ethics approval is not required, as this study is a literature review.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021244753.

Editorial Perspective: Prescribing measures: unintended negative consequences of mandating standardized mental health measurement

In July 2020, two of the largest funders of mental health research worldwide - the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and the Wellcome Trust - announced plans to standardize mental health measurement. Specifically, obtaining funding for research related to depression and anxiety will be conditional on using four specific measures. While we agree that there are obvious benefits to standardizing mental health measurement, some of which are discussed in the announcement by NIMH and Wellcome, here we focus on potential unintended negative consequences of this initiative: Lacking transferability across settings: scales were developed for specific settings (e.g. community, clinic) and purposes (e.g. intervention studies), and their properties might not be easily transferable between settings. Narrowing the scope of inquiry: individuals experience mental health difficulties in wide-ranging ways, and the narrow scope of the proposed scales risks limiting important insights for research and treatments. Lowering the threshold for robust evidence: empirical findings limited to a specific imperfect measure are less robust than if such evidence is (re)produced across multiple scales. Creating a two-tiered mental health science: arbitrarily conferring gold standard status on some imperfect measures over others will create an artificial two-tiered system leading to an impoverishment of mental health research. Recommendations for mitigating these negative consequences include the following: mandating a wider set of measures that have been validated for specific populations and research purposes, funding research assessing the measurement properties of scales across settings and purposes, stressing the limitations of mandated measures to avoid en masse application and replacement of measures across studies and health systems and creating speed bumps to ensure that any widespread adoption of mandated measures does not result in impoverishment of mental health science.

Network-level functional topological changes after mindfulness-based cognitive therapy in mood dysregulated adolescents at familial risk for bipolar disorder: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Given that psychopharmacological approaches routinely used to treat mood-related problems may result in adverse outcomes in mood dysregulated adolescents at familial risk for bipolar disorder (BD), Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Children (MBCT-C) provides an alternative effective and safe option. However, little is known about the brain mechanisms of beneficial outcomes from this intervention. Herein, we aimed to investigate the network-level neurofunctional effects of MBCT-C in mood dysregulated adolescents.

METHODS

Ten mood dysregulated adolescents at familial risk for BD underwent a 12-week MBCT-C intervention. Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was performed prior to and following MBCT-C. Topological metrics of three intrinsic functional networks (default mode network (DMN), fronto-parietal network (FPN) and cingulo-opercular network (CON)) were investigated respectively using graph theory analysis.

RESULTS

Following MBCT-C, mood dysregulated adolescents showed increased global efficiency and decreased characteristic path length within both CON and FPN. Enhanced functional connectivity strength of frontal and limbic areas were identified within the DMN and CON. Moreover, change in characteristic path length within the CON was suggested to be significantly related to change in the Emotion Regulation Checklist score.

CONCLUSIONS

12-week MBCT-C treatment in mood dysregulated adolescents at familial risk for BD yield network-level neurofunctional effects within the FPN and CON, suggesting enhanced functional integration of the dual-network. Decreased characteristic path length of the CON may be associated with the improvement of emotion regulation following mindfulness training. However, current findings derived from small sample size should be interpreted with caution. Future randomized controlled trials including larger samples are critical to validate our findings.

Systematic Review: The Measurement Properties of the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised in Adolescents With Major Depressive Disorder

OBJECTIVE

To systematically appraise existing evidence of the measurement properties of the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) in adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD). The CDRS-R is the most commonly used scale in adolescent depression research, yet was originally designed for use in children 6 to 12 years old.

METHOD

Seven databases were searched for studies that evaluated the measurement properties of the CDRS-R in adolescents (ages 12-18 years). Of 65 studies screened by full-text, 6 were included. Measurement properties were appraised using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines. The COSMIN minimum requirements for recommending the use of an outcome measurement instrument are (1) evidence for sufficient content validity (any level of evidence), and (2) at least low-quality evidence for sufficient internal consistency.

RESULTS

Four studies assessed an English-language version of the CDRS-R; the other 2 assessed German and Korean versions, respectively. No study assessed content validity, cross-cultural validity/measurement invariance, or measurement error of the CDRS-R in adolescents with MDD. Low-quality evidence was found for sufficient construct validity (n = 4 studies) and responsiveness (n = 2 studies) assessed via comparator instruments. Very-low-quality evidence was found for sufficient interrater reliability (n = 2 studies). The results for structural validity (n = 3 studies) and internal consistency (n = 5 studies) were inconclusive.

CONCLUSION

It remains unclear whether the CDRS-R appropriately measures depressive symptom severity in adolescent MDD. Before use of the CDRS-R in adolescent MDD research can be recommended, evidence of sufficient psychometric properties in adolescents with MDD is needed.

Primary outcome reporting in adolescent depression clinical trials needs standardization

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based health care is informed by results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and their syntheses in meta-analyses. When the trial outcomes measured are not clearly described in trial publications, knowledge synthesis, translation, and decision-making may be impeded. While heterogeneity in outcomes measured in adolescent major depressive disorder (MDD) RCTs has been described, the comprehensiveness of outcome reporting is unknown. This study aimed to assess the reporting of primary outcomes in RCTs evaluating treatments for adolescent MDD.

METHODS

RCTs evaluating treatment interventions in adolescents with a diagnosis of MDD published between 2008 and 2017 specifying a single primary outcome were eligible for outcome reporting assessment. Outcome reporting assessment was done independently in duplicate using a comprehensive checklist of 58 reporting items. Primary outcome information provided in each RCT publication was scored as "fully reported", "partially reported", or "not reported" for each checklist item, as applicable.

RESULTS

Eighteen of 42 identified articles were found to have a discernable single primary outcome and were included for outcome reporting assessment. Most trials (72%) did not fully report on over half of the 58 checklist items. Items describing masking of outcome assessors, timing and frequency of outcome assessment, and outcome analyses were fully reported in over 70% of trials. Items less frequently reported included outcome measurement instrument properties (ranging from 6 to 17%), justification of timing and frequency of outcome assessment (6%), and justification of criteria used for clinically significant differences (17%). The overall comprehensiveness of reporting appeared stable over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Heterogeneous reporting exists in published adolescent MDD RCTs, with frequent omissions of key details about their primary outcomes. These omissions may impair interpretability, replicability, and synthesis of RCTs that inform clinical guidelines and decision-making in this field. Consensus on the minimal criteria for outcome reporting in adolescent MDD RCTs is needed.