Unwanted effects of treatments for depression in children and adolescents: a mapping of systematic reviews

Updating the WHO Model Lists of Essential Medicines to promote global access to the most cost-effective and safe medicines for mental disorders

Since 1977, the WHO Model Lists of Essential Medicines (EML) have been a benchmark to guide the procurement of medicines at the national level, especially in low-income and middle-income countries. Aiming to include the most effective, safe, and cost-effective medicines for priority conditions, WHO updates the EML for adults and the EML for children every 2 years. Over the past 45 years, updates to the EML mental health section have been infrequent, in most cases with additions of individual medicines. A comprehensive revision of the entire section has never been attempted. With the aim of increasing the use of the WHO EML to expand the selection of the most effective and safe medicines for mental disorders, a series of evidence-based applications were submitted to the WHO Expert Committee on the Selection and Use of Essential Medicines in 2022, recommending a substantial revision of the entire mental health section. In this Health Policy, we summarise the recommended update and the evidence justifying it. We also discuss challenges in the update process, suggesting possible solutions. The requested comprehensive revision of the WHO EML mental health section aligns the list with the latest evidence. The revision offers an opportunity for countries to promote access to the most effective, safe, and cost-effective medicines for mental disorders, contributing to universal health coverage and global mental health equity.

Research in child and adolescent anxiety and depression: treatment uncertainties prioritised by youth and professionals

Background: A starting point for evaluating the effectiveness of treatments should be to identify evidence gaps. Furthermore, such evaluations should consider the perspectives of patients, clinicians and carers to ensure relevance and potentially influence future research initiatives. Methods: Our approach, inspired by the James Lind Alliance methods, involved three steps. First, we performed a document analysis by identifying interventions and outcomes in two recently published overviews of systematic reviews, which summarised the effects of interventions for anxiety and depression in children and adolescents. Second, we surveyed children and adolescents with personal experiences of depression or anxiety as well as clinicians, and asked them to suggest treatments and outcomes associated with uncertainty. Finally, we facilitated a consensus process where clinicians and youth mental health patient representatives were invited to prioritise research uncertainties in separate consensus processes. Results: The survey included 674 respondents who reported a total of 1267 uncertainties. Independent coding by four investigators revealed 134 suggestions for treatments of anxiety, 90 suggestions for treatments of depression, 84 for outcomes of interventions for anxiety and 71 suggestions for outcomes of interventions for depression. Two separate priority setting workshops with eight clinicians and ten youth resulted in four independent top ten priority lists. Conclusion: Top ten lists of treatments and outcome domains of anxiety and depression in children and adolescents was identified by youth and clinicians. The results may influence the research agenda, and ultimately benefit patients.

Prenatal Alcohol Exposure and the Risk of Depression in Offspring: a Meta-Analysis

Background

Prenatal alcohol exposure (PAE) has been related to poor consequences of mental health in offspring. However, it remains unknown whether maternal alcohol drinking during pregnancy is associated with depression in the offspring.

Methods

A meta-analysis was performed accordingly. Relevant observational studies were identified from Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. A fixed-effect or a random-effect model was selected dependending on the between-study heterogeneity.

Results

Eight cohort studies were included. The heterogeneity was not significant (I 2 = 14%). A meta-analysis with a fixed-effect model showed that PAE was associated with a higher risk of depression in offspring (odds ratio (OR): 2.28, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.61 to 3.25, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that moderate (OR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.22 to 2.49, p=0.002, I 2 = 0%) or heavy (OR: 2.41, 95% CI: 1.55 to 3.73, p < 0.001, I 2 = 0%) maternal alcohol drinking in pregnancy was associated with depression in offspring, but not for those with low maternal alcohol drinking (OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.44, p=0.10, I 2 = 0%). Further subgroup analyses according to study design, timing of PAE evaluation, age at depression diagnosis, and quality scores showed consistent results. Univariate metaregression showed a dose-response association between PAE and offspring depression (coefficient: 0.073, 95% CI: 0.019 to 0.127, p=0.014).

Conclusions

Current evidence suggests that PAE may be a risk factor of depression in offspring.