A person-centered approach to studying associations between psychosocial vulnerability factors and adolescent depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation in a Canadian longitudinal sample

Initial risk factors, self-compassion trajectories, and well-being outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: A person-centered approach

Introduction

We investigated whether initial risk classes and heterogeneous trajectories of self-compassion over the course of the pandemic may impact well-being outcomes 1 year into the pandemic.

Methods

A large, representative sample of Canadians (N = 3,613; 50.6% women) was sampled longitudinally over 11 waves (April 2020-April 2021), using a rolling cross-sectional survey design. Analyses were conducted in three steps: (1) latent class analysis to identify heterogeneity in risk factors (sociodemographic, cognitive-personality, health-related) early in the pandemic, (2) latent class growth analysis (LCGA) to identify longitudinal self-compassion trajectories, and (3) GLM to examine effects of risk factor classes and self-compassion trajectories, as well as their interaction, on later well-being (mental health, perceived control, life satisfaction).

Results and Discussion

Four risk factor classes emerged, with 50.9% of participants experiencing low risk, 14.3% experiencing multiple risks, 20.8% experiencing Cognitive-Personality and Health risks, and 14.0% experiencing sociodemographic and Cognitive-Personality risks. Four self-compassion trajectories also emerged, with 47.7% of participants experiencing moderate-high self-compassion that decreased then stabilized, 32.0% experiencing moderate self-compassion that decreased then stabilized, 17.3% experiencing high and stable self-compassion across time, and 3.0% experiencing low and decreasing self-compassion. Comparisons of well-being outcomes 1 year post-pandemic indicated that higher levels of self-compassion over time may protect against the impact of initial risk on well-being outcomes. Further work is still needed on heterogeneity in experiences of risk and protective factors during stressful life events.

Controversies In The Pharmacotherapy Of Adolescent Depression

BACKGROUND

Although fluoxetine and, in the USA, escitalopram are approved for depression in adolescence, substantial concern surrounds antidepressant use in youth. Major controversies regarding efficacy and safety (increased suicidality).

INTRODUCTION

The cathegory of depression is very broad and overinclusive, in terms of etiology, role of psychosocial adversities severity, episodicity, presentation, relationship with bipolarity. This heterogeneity, not fully controlled considered in Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs), may account for the disappointing results on both efficacy and safety.

METHOD

Based on the available literature, we will address the following topics: a) controversies regarding the definition of depression as a unique homogeneous condition with a unique type of pharmacological treatment; b) controversies about the interpretation of data from Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) on the efficacy of pharmacological treatments in adolescent depression; c) the interpretation of data regarding the safety of antidepressant treatment in adolescent depression, particularly in terms of increased suicidal risk.

RESULTS

According to RCTs, antidepressants are minimally to moderately more effective than placebo, principally based on very high placebo responses, and only fluoxetine showed more evidence of efficacy. These differences in meta-analyses are sometimes statistically, but not clinically significant. Depression is a heterogeneous condition in terms of etiology, role of psychosocial adversities severity, episodicity, presentation, relationship with bipolarity. This heterogeneity may partly explain the low drug-placebo difference and the high placebo response (possibly related to a high level of natural recovery of the adolescent depression). In the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)-funded studies, including a lower number of study sites and more reliable enrollment procedures, lower placebo response rates and greater group differences between medication and placebo were found. Robust evidence supports an increased risk of emergent suicidality after starting antidepressants. A clear age effect on suicidal risk after antidepressants is supported by a comprehensive meta-analysis, showing that suicidal risk increased with decreasing age, being markedly greater in subjects aged between 18 and 25 years. However, the term suicidality is too broad, as it includes suicidal ideation, suicidal attempts, and completed suicide, with a hugely wide range of severity and pervasiveness. If emergent suicidality should be actively and carefully explored, empirical evidence, albeit weak, suggests that combined pharmacotherapy (antidepressant and/or lithium) associated with psychotherapy may be helpful in reducing pretreatment suicidal ideation and suicidal risk.

DISCUSSION

Moderate to severe depression should be treated with psychotherapy and/or fluoxetine, the best-supported medication, and treatment-resistant adolescents should always receive combined treatment with psychotherapy. Suicidal ideation, particularly with a plan, should be actively explored before starting an antidepressant, as a reason for the closest monitoring. Emergent suicidality after starting antidepressants, as well as antidepressant-related activation, should also be closely monitored and may lead to antidepressant discontinuation. Although no response to pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy may occur in up to 40% of depressed adolescents, possible predictors or mediators of poorer response in adolescents are uncertain, and only a few studies support possible treatment strategies. Finally, studies exploring the efficacy of antidepressants in specific depression subtypes, i.e., based on prevalent psychopathological dimensions (apathy, withdrawal, impulsivity), are warranted.