Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T12:42:48.603Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Is combined antidepressant medication (ADM) and psychotherapy better than either monotherapy at preventing suicide attempts and other psychiatric serious adverse events for depressed patients? A rare events meta-analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 November 2023

Nur Hani Zainal*
Affiliation:
Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA Department of Psychology, National University of Singapore, Singapore
*
Corresponding author: Nur Hani Zainal; Email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Antidepressant medication (ADM)-only, psychotherapy-only, and their combination are the first-line treatment options for major depressive disorder (MDD). Previous meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) established that psychotherapy and combined treatment were superior to ADM-only for MDD treatment remission or response. The current meta-analysis extended previous ones by determining the comparative efficacy of ADM-only, psychotherapy-only, and combined treatment on suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events (i.e. psychiatric emergency department [ED] visit, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death; SAEs). Peto odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals were computed from the present random-effects meta-analysis. Thirty-four relevant RCTs were included. Psychotherapy-only was stronger than combined treatment (1.9% v. 3.7%; OR 1.96 [1.20–3.20], p = 0.012) and ADM-only (3.0% v. 5.6%; OR 0.45 [0.30–0.67], p = 0.001) in decreasing the likelihood of SAEs in the primary and trim-and-fill sensitivity analyses. Combined treatment was better than ADM-only in reducing the probability of SAEs (6.0% v. 8.7%; OR 0.74 [0.56–0.96], p = 0.029), but this comparative efficacy finding was non-significant in the sensitivity analyses. Subgroup analyses revealed the advantage of psychotherapy-only over combined treatment and ADM-only for reducing SAE risk among children and adolescents and the benefit of combined treatment over ADM-only among adults. Overall, psychotherapy and combined treatment outperformed ADM-only in reducing the likelihood of SAEs, perhaps by conferring strategies to enhance reasons for living. Plausibly, psychotherapy should be prioritized for high-risk youths and combined treatment for high-risk adults with MDD.

Type
Review Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common mental disorder entwined with impaired functioning in academic, occupational, and social domains (Kupferberg, Bicks, & Hasler, Reference Kupferberg, Bicks and Hasler2016) and compromised physical health (Zainal & Newman, Reference Zainal and Newman2022) and quality of life (Hohls, Konig, & Hajek, Reference Hohls, Konig and Hajek2023). Economically, MDD imposes a hefty financial burden on government budgets due to substantial healthcare utilization costs, increased absenteeism and presenteeism, and reduced work productivity (Greenberg et al., Reference Greenberg, Fournier, Sisitsky, Simes, Berman, Koenigsberg and Kessler2021). One of the most devastating consequences of MDD is mortality due to a suicide attempt and other related causes (Chiu et al., Reference Chiu, Liu, Li, Tsai, Chen and Kuo2023). Determining effective treatments for MDD to reduce the risk for or prevent suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events is thus essential.

The first-line treatments for MDD include psychotherapy-only, especially cognitive-behavioral and related therapies, antidepressant medication (ADM)-only, and combined treatment (GBD 2017 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators, 2018). Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined MDD treatment response or remission rates as primary outcomes of interest showed that combined treatment conferred a substantially stronger aggregate effect than ADM-only, psychotherapy-only had a better aggregate effect than ADM-only, and the aggregate effect between combined treatment and psychotherapy-only was not different (Cuijpers et al., Reference Cuijpers, Miguel, Harrer, Plessen, Ciharova, Ebert and Karyotaki2023; Furukawa et al., Reference Furukawa, Shinohara, Sahker, Karyotaki, Miguel, Ciharova and Cuijpers2021; Karyotaki et al., Reference Karyotaki, Smit, Holdt Henningsen, Huibers, Robays, de Beurs and Cuijpers2016). Collectively, such findings might translate to the possibility that MDD treatments that comprise psychotherapy, especially those that embody cognitive-behavioral and related theories, would be associated with reduced risk of suicide attempts and associated serious psychiatric adverse events.

Only six meta-analyses have determined if psychotherapy or ADM monotherapies mitigated the risk for suicide attempts and related serious psychiatric adverse events. Five recent meta-analyses showed that depressed patients randomized to psychotherapy-only, such as cognitive-behavioral therapies (CBT; Calati & Courtet, Reference Calati and Courtet2016; Gotzsche & Gotzsche, Reference Gotzsche and Gotzsche2017), dialectical behavioral therapy (Kothgassner, Robinson, Goreis, Ougrin, & Plener, Reference Kothgassner, Robinson, Goreis, Ougrin and Plener2020), psychodynamic-oriented therapies (Briggs et al., Reference Briggs, Netuveli, Gould, Gkaravella, Gluckman, Kangogyere and Lindner2019), and suicide-focused psychotherapies (Riblet, Shiner, Young-Xu, & Watts, Reference Riblet, Shiner, Young-Xu and Watts2017), were less likely to engage in suicide attempt, self-harm behaviors, and encounter other serious psychiatric adverse events compared to their counterparts assigned to treatment-as-usual or waitlist. However, another recent meta-analysis showed that the probability for depressed patients randomized to receive ADM to experience any of these serious psychiatric adverse events was not different from those who received placebos (Braun, Bschor, Franklin, & Baethge, Reference Braun, Bschor, Franklin and Baethge2016). Further, a major limitation of these meta-analyses was the exclusion of RCTs that examined the comparative effects of psychotherapy-only, ADM-only, and combined treatment.

Accordingly, the present exploratory meta-analysis evaluated the comparative effects of psychotherapy-only, ADM-only, and combined treatment on suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events. Such serious psychiatric adverse events included psychiatric emergency department (ED) visits, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide deaths among depressed patients. Knowing what treatment option works best to decrease the likelihood of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events at the aggregate level could aid with successful suicide prevention efforts for depressed patients.

Method

Procedures and eligibility criteria

The present meta-analysis protocol was preregistered on the Open Science Framework (OSF; https://osf.io/c7z8d) and the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42023443819). The conventional approach instructed by Cochrane was applied for the analyses, and the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed in reporting the methods and results (Fig. 1; Moher et al., Reference Moher, Shamseer, Clarke, Ghersi, Liberati, Petticrew and Group2015; Page et al., Reference Page, McKenzie, Bossuyt, Boutron, Hoffmann, Mulrow and Moher2021). The inclusion criteria included clinical trials that reported on number of patients with suicide attempts and/or other serious psychiatric adverse events (i.e. psychiatric ED visit, psychiatric hospitalization, or suicide death) at post-treatment in the intervention and control arms. Baseline randomization to psychotherapy-only, ADM-only, or combined treatment and recruitment of patients with a primary diagnosis of a depressive disorder was required. Following best practices, relevant RCTs that reported zero suicide attempts and serious psychiatric adverse events in the treatment and control arms were included, given that this is a more conservative method and enhances the generalizability of the results (Friedrich, Adhikari, & Beyene, Reference Friedrich, Adhikari and Beyene2007). Exclusion criteria included studies that used waitlist, treatment-as-usual, placebo, or another active control (e.g. ketamine) as a comparator, non-RCTs, and RCTs that did not recruit patients with a primary diagnosis of a depressive disorder. Although challenges in utilizing RCTs to examine rare outcomes such as suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events were acknowledged, RCTs can provide essential information on the comparative risk of such serious psychiatric adverse events when evaluating two or more treatment options. Nonetheless, the present meta-analysis centered on RCTs given that it is the gold standard design to determine comparative effectiveness (or efficacy; Rosen, Manor, Engelhard, & Zucker, Reference Rosen, Manor, Engelhard and Zucker2006), and an adequate number of RCTs (i.e. 34 eligible RCTs; Fig. 1) have examined how psychotherapy-only, ADM-only, and combined treatment might reduce the risk of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events. Table 1 summarizes the 34 eligible RCTs in the present meta-analysis and relays information about the number of suicide attempts, psychiatric ED visits, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide deaths extracted from each RCT.

Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram. PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; RCT, randomized controlled trial; ADM, antidepressant medication; PSY, psychotherapy; SA, suicide attempt.

Table 1. Summary of RCTs that examined comparative average treatment effect (ATE) of antidepressant medication (ADM) and/or psychotherapy (PSY) predicting suicide attempt (SAs), psychiatric emergency department (ED) visit, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death

ATE, average treatment effect (or efficacy); ADM, antidepressant medication; CBT, individual cognitive behavioral therapy; CI, confidence interval; CT, cognitive therapy; ED, emergency department; GCBT, group CBT; MDD, major depressive disorder; OR, odds ratio; PCP, primary care physician; PSY, psychotherapy; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SA, suicide attempt; SP, supportive psychotherapy; SSRI, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor.

aOnline Supplementary Table S1 details blow-by-blow how each study reported the rates of suicide attempt(s) and/or other serious psychiatric adverse event(s) (psychiatric ED visit, psychiatric hospitalization, or suicide death) in each arm.

b These RCTs were not included in the current meta-analysis as the exact rates of SA and/or psychiatric hospitalization in each intervention and comparator arm were not reported.

Study selection

Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, PubMed, and ScienceDirect were searched from the inception of each database until 30 June 2023, to identify published articles evaluating our research question. The following search terms and Boolean terms were used: (‘suicide attempt’) AND (‘antidepressant’) AND (‘psychotherapy’) AND (‘trial’) AND (‘depression’) AND (‘serious adverse events’). A highly sensitive search approach that prioritized the detection of RCTs in these online databases was used (Riblet et al., Reference Riblet, Shiner, Young-Xu and Watts2017). Online Supplementary Table S1 details blow-by-blow how each study measured and reported the rates of suicide attempt(s) and/or other serious psychiatric adverse event(s) in each arm.

Intervention arms

Concerning psychotherapy type, the most common face-to-face psychotherapy was individual CBT (n = 11, 32.4%), followed by individual, interpersonal psychotherapy (n = 5, 14.7%), group CBT (n = 1, 2.9%), and psychotherapy without a specified theoretical orientation (n = 1, 2.9%). The remaining 16 studies (47.1%) did not use psychotherapy-only as a comparator. Regarding ADM type, most studies did not specify the ADM type (n = 15, 44.1%) followed by selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (i.e. citalopram, fluoxetine, imipramine, sertraline; n = 12, 35.3%), and venlafaxine (a serotonin–norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor; n = 1, 2.9%). The remaining six studies (17.6%) did not use ADM-only as a comparator.

Data analyses

Using the Peto approach (Bradburn, Deeks, Berlin, & Russell Localio, Reference Bradburn, Deeks, Berlin and Russell Localio2007; Lane, Reference Lane2013), summary odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and p values were computed. Standard meta-analytic techniques (e.g. calculating risk ratio) are not recommended to determine rare outcomes such as suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events (i.e. psychiatric ED visits, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death; Bradburn et al., Reference Bradburn, Deeks, Berlin and Russell Localio2007; Lane, Reference Lane2013). The Peto approach is an appropriate and robust alternative option for meta-analyzing data when event rates are less than 1% (Bradburn et al., Reference Bradburn, Deeks, Berlin and Russell Localio2007; Lane, Reference Lane2013). No continuity correction for treatment arms with zero negative outcome events was applied since prior research showed that it would bias estimates with the Peto approach (Friedrich et al., Reference Friedrich, Adhikari and Beyene2007; Sweeting, Sutton, & Lambert, Reference Sweeting, Sutton and Lambert2004).

The rmeta R package was used to conduct these random-effects meta-analyses for rare events and to generate forest plots. The conventional definition of an OR was used to interpret the present findings (i.e. likelihood of the occurrence of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events v. likelihood of the non-occurrence of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events in the intervention arm v. comparator arm). An OR value < 1 indicated that the relative odds of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events were lower in the treatment arm v. comparator arm, and the opposite was true with an OR value > 1. The OR was considered to be statistically significant if the 95% CIs did not cross 1 (Szumilas, Reference Szumilas2010). Standard thresholds of Cochrane's Q p value < 0.10 and I 2 > 50% were used to determine between-study heterogeneity (Deeks, Higgins, & Altman, Reference Deeks, Higgins, Altman, J. P. T., J, J, M., T., M. J. and V. A.2019).

Contour-enhanced funnel plots were created to evaluate publication bias to determine if any funnel plot asymmetry indicated substantial publication bias (Peters, Sutton, Jones, Abrams, & Rushton, Reference Peters, Sutton, Jones, Abrams and Rushton2008). Moreover, Harbord's modified assessment of small study effects was used to test for publication bias for binary outcomes (Harbord, Egger, & Sterne, Reference Harbord, Egger and Sterne2006; Peters, Sutton, Jones, Abrams, & Rushton, Reference Peters, Sutton, Jones, Abrams and Rushton2006) with the meta R package (Balduzzi, Rucker, & Schwarzer, Reference Balduzzi, Rucker and Schwarzer2019). This approach utilized a modified linear regression analysis to detect significant funnel plot asymmetry that would denote publication bias (i.e. with a p < 0.05 value; Harbord et al., Reference Harbord, Egger and Sterne2006). The Harbord approach is stronger than other standard tests of publication bias under conditions of few events per RCT (Harbord et al., Reference Harbord, Egger and Sterne2006). Sensitivity analyses were also conducted with Duval and Tweedie trim-and-fill method (Duval & Tweedie, Reference Duval and Tweedie2000) to determine if the pattern of outcomes from the primary analyses changes after adjusting for any funnel plot asymmetry caused by publication biases. In addition, to assess study quality, the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used (Higgins et al., Reference Higgins, Altman, Gøtzsche, Jüni, Moher, Oxman and Sterne2011) with the robvis R package to generate risk-of-bias plots (McGuinness & Higgins, Reference McGuinness and Higgins2020).

The heterogeneity of treatment effects was explored in the present meta-analysis. Specifically, we conducted subgroup analyses of the comparative treatment effects by age group (adults or youths), study duration (1.5–5, 6–12, or 13–60 months), and treatment setting (outpatient v. inpatient). In the case of continuous effect modifiers (moderators), our meta-regression analyses utilized a restricted maximum likelihood model, incorporating the Knapp–Hartung method (Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, & Rothstein, Reference Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins and Rothstein2009). Specifically, we determined how mean age, percentage of females, prior suicide attempts, patients with recurrent v. first-onset MDD, and any psychiatric comorbidities might modify the average treatment effects.

Results

Study characteristics

Thirty-one out of 34 studies reported baseline sociodemographic variables. The sample age averaged 32.06 years (standard deviation [s.d.] = 14.57, range = 13.80–58.43), and percentage of females was 61.6% across those studies. Regarding study duration, 16 studies (47.1%) reported on 3–5-month follow-up outcomes, another 11 studies (32.4%) on 6–12-month follow-up outcomes, and the remaining seven studies (20.6%) on 13–60-month follow-up outcomes. Concerning RCT design, four were four-arm trials (11.8%), eight were three-arm trials (23.5%), and 22 were two-arm trials (64.7%). Most RCTs occurred within outpatient settings (n = 30, 88.2%) compared to inpatient locations (n = 4, 11.8%). The following variables were regarded as various indices of suicide risk (indexed as percentages): prior suicide attempts (number of studies [k] = 34, observed mean [M] = 17.72, standard deviation [s.d.] = 28.06, range = 0–100), recurrent v. first-onset MDD (k = 32, M = 61.60, s.d. = 39.87, range = 0–100), and any psychiatric comorbidities (k = 20, M = 59.32, s.d. = 29.93, range = 5.2–100).

Combined treatment v. psychotherapy-only

Seventeen RCTs determined the comparative treatment effects of combined treatment v. psychotherapy-only on suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events. Forty-seven out of 1273 (3.7%) in the combined treatment arm and 24 out of 1240 (1.9%) in the psychotherapy-only arm had suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events, and this difference was statistically significant (OR 1.96 [1.20–3.20], p = 0.012). There was no significant between-study heterogeneity (Q[df = 11] = 9.29, p = 0.595; I 2 = 0.0% [0.0–58.3]; τ 2 = 0 [0.00–1.56], p = 0.60) when comparing combined treatment to psychotherapy-only (Fig. 2). Subgroup analysis revealed that the average treatment effect of lower suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events in psychotherapy-only over combined treatment was statistically significant in youths (OR 1.86 [1.07–3.23]) but not in adults (OR 1.95 [0.52–7.35]; Table 2 part A). However, study duration (Table 2 part A), mean age, percentage of females, prior suicide attempts, patients with recurrent MDD, and psychiatric comorbidities (Table 3 part A) were non-significant effect modifiers. All studies within this set of combined treatment v. psychotherapy-only comparisons occurred in outpatient treatment settings.

Figure 2. Forest plot for average treatment effect comparing combined treatment v. psychotherapy-onlya. ADM, antidepressant medication; PSY, psychotherapy; OR, Peto odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; I 2, an index of between-study heterogeneity expressed in a percentage, such that higher values indicated more between-study heterogeneity; τ 2, tau-squared statistic, such that a statistically significant τ 2 indicated substantial between-study variance of the underlying distribution of true effect sizes. aEvents referred to the number of patient(s) (if any) within a specific treatment arm that had a negative treatment outcome (i.e. suicide attempt [SA], psychiatric emergency department [ED] visit, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death). The random-effects model only pertained to studies that examined SA as an outcome (Bockting et al., Reference Bockting, Klein, Elgersma, van Rijsbergen, Slofstra, Ormel and Burger2018; Cornelius et al., Reference Cornelius, Bukstein, Wood, Kirisci, Douaihy and Clark2009; Davey et al., Reference Davey, Chanen, Hetrick, Cotton, Ratheesh, Amminger and Berk2019; Deas et al., Reference Deas, Randall, Roberts and Anton2000; Hollon et al., Reference Hollon, DeRubeis, Evans, Wiemer, Garvey, Grove and Tuason1992; Iftene et al., Reference Iftene, Predescu, Stefan and David2015; Khazanov et al., Reference Khazanov, Xu, Hollon, DeRubeis and Thase2021; Kuyken et al., Reference Kuyken, Byford, Taylor, Watkins, Holden, White and Teasdale2008; Kuyken et al., Reference Kuyken, Hayes, Barrett, Byng, Dalgleish, Kessler and Byford2015; Lespérance et al., Reference Lespérance, Frasure-Smith, Koszycki, Laliberté, van Zyl, Baker and Guertin2007; March et al., Reference March, Silva, Petrycki, Curry, Wells, Fairbank and Severe2004; March et al., Reference March, Silva, Petrycki, Curry, Wells, Fairbank and Severe2007; Melvin et al., Reference Melvin, Tonge, King, Heyne, Gordon and Klimkeit2006; Vitiello et al., Reference Vitiello, Silva, Rohde, Kratochvil, Kennard, Reinecke and March2009; Vitriol et al., Reference Vitriol, Ballesteros, Florenzano, Weil and Benadof2009). There were too few studies that examined psychiatric ED visit (Riggs et al., Reference Riggs, Mikulich-Gilbertson, Davies, Lohman, Klein and Stover2007), psychiatric hospitalization (Browne et al., Reference Browne, Steiner, Roberts, Gafni, Byrne, Dunn and Kraemer2002; Hollon et al., Reference Hollon, DeRubeis, Evans, Wiemer, Garvey, Grove and Tuason1992; Huijbers et al., Reference Huijbers, Spinhoven, Spijker, Ruhe, van Schaik, van Oppen and Speckens2015), and suicide death (Bockting et al., Reference Bockting, Klein, Elgersma, van Rijsbergen, Slofstra, Ormel and Burger2018; Hollon et al., Reference Hollon, DeRubeis, Evans, Wiemer, Garvey, Grove and Tuason1992; Kuyken et al., Reference Kuyken, Hayes, Barrett, Byng, Dalgleish, Kessler and Byford2015; Vitiello et al., Reference Vitiello, Silva, Rohde, Kratochvil, Kennard, Reinecke and March2009) to conduct a random-effects model meta-analysis separately by those adverse outcomes.

Table 2. Subgroup analysis

k, Number of studies; OR, Peto odds ratio; CI, lower and upper limits of the 95% confidence interval; Q, Cochrane's heterogeneity index denoting within-subgroup heterogeneity (Q WITHIN) or between-subgroup heterogeneity (Q BETWEEN); I 2, index of between-study heterogeneity; ADM, antidepressant medication.

* Significant estimates at the p < 0.05 α level (two-tailed).

Table 3. Meta-regression analysis

β, meta-regression estimate; CI, lower and upper limits of the 95% confidence interval; p, p value associated with β; %, percentage of; ADM, antidepressant medication; MDD, major depressive disorder; MH, mental health.

* Significant estimates at the p < 0.05 α level (two-tailed).

Combined treatment v. ADM-only

Twenty-three RCTs examined the comparative treatment effects of combined treatment v. ADM-only. In total, 133 out of 2213 (6.0%) in the combined treatment arm and 162 out of 1855 (8.7%) in the ADM-only arm had suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events, and this difference was statistically significant (OR 0.74 [0.56–0.96], p = 0.029). There was no significant between-study heterogeneity (Q[df = 18] = 15.96, p = 0.595; I 2 = 0.0% [0.0–48.9]; τ 2 = 0.04 [0.00–0.36], p = 0.60) when comparing combined treatment to ADM-only (Fig. 3). Subgroup analysis revealed that the average treatment effect of lower suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events in combined treatment over ADM-only was statistically significant in adults (OR 0.66 [0.45–0.96]) but not in youths (OR 0.80 [0.51–1.25]), and during follow-ups of 1.5–5 months (OR 0.59 [0.37–0.93]) but not 6–12 months (OR 0.71 [0.44–1.18]) and 13–60 months (OR 0.90 [0.45–1.79]; Table 2 part B). This average treatment effect was significantly stronger as the percentage of females increased (β = 0.030 [0.004–0.055], p = 0.026) and psychiatric comorbidities increased (β = 0.015 [0.006–0.025], p = 0.007; Table 3 part B). However, mean age, percentage of prior suicide attempts, and patients with recurrent MDD were non-significant effect modifiers. There were insufficient studies to determine whether the treatment setting (outpatient v. inpatient) might be an effect modifier.

Figure 3. Forest plot for average treatment effect comparing combined treatment v. ADM-onlya. ADM, antidepressant medication; PSY, psychotherapy; OR, Peto odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; I 2, an index of between-study heterogeneity expressed in a percentage, such that higher values indicated more between-study heterogeneity; τ 2, tau-squared statistic, such that a statistically significant τ 2 indicated substantial between-study variance of the underlying distribution of true effect sizes. aEvents referred to number of patient(s) (if any) within a specific treatment arm that had a negative treatment outcome (i.e. suicide attempt, psychiatric emergency department [ED] visits, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death). The random-effects model only pertained to studies that examined SA as an outcome (Bockting et al., Reference Bockting, Klein, Elgersma, van Rijsbergen, Slofstra, Ormel and Burger2018; Brent et al., Reference Brent, Emslie, Clarke, Asarnow, Spirito, Ritz and Keller2009; Goodyer et al., Reference Goodyer, Dubicka, Wilkinson, Kelvin, Roberts, Byford and Harrington2007; Hollon et al., Reference Hollon, DeRubeis, Evans, Wiemer, Garvey, Grove and Tuason1992; Iftene et al., Reference Iftene, Predescu, Stefan and David2015; Kennard et al., Reference Kennard, Emslie, Mayes, Nakonezny, Jones, Foxwell and King2014; Khazanov et al., Reference Khazanov, Xu, Hollon, DeRubeis and Thase2021; Kocsis et al., Reference Kocsis, Thase, Trivedi, Shelton, Kornstein, Nemeroff and Keller2007; Lespérance et al., Reference Lespérance, Frasure-Smith, Koszycki, Laliberté, van Zyl, Baker and Guertin2007; March et al., Reference March, Silva, Petrycki, Curry, Wells, Fairbank and Severe2004; March et al., Reference March, Silva, Petrycki, Curry, Wells, Fairbank and Severe2007; Melvin et al., Reference Melvin, Tonge, King, Heyne, Gordon and Klimkeit2006; Michel et al., Reference Michel, Gysin-Maillart, Breit, Walther and Pavlidou2021; Schramm et al., Reference Schramm, van Calker, Dykierek, Lieb, Kech, Zobel and Berger2007; Vitiello et al., Reference Vitiello, Silva, Rohde, Kratochvil, Kennard, Reinecke and March2009; Wei et al., Reference Wei, Liu, Bi, Li, Hou, Tan and Liu2013; Wilkinson et al., Reference Wilkinson, Kelvin, Roberts, Dubicka and Goodyer2011). There were too few studies that examined psychiatric hospitalization (Browne et al., Reference Browne, Steiner, Roberts, Gafni, Byrne, Dunn and Kraemer2002; Hollon et al., Reference Hollon, DeRubeis, Evans, Wiemer, Garvey, Grove and Tuason1992; Kennard et al., Reference Kennard, Emslie, Mayes, Nakonezny, Jones, Foxwell and King2014; Mandoki et al., Reference Mandoki, Tapia, Tapia, Sumner and Parker1997; Nakagawa et al., Reference Nakagawa, Mitsuda, Sado, Abe, Fujisawa, Kikuchi and Ono2017; Schramm et al., Reference Schramm, van Calker, Dykierek, Lieb, Kech, Zobel and Berger2007) and suicide death (Bockting et al., Reference Bockting, Klein, Elgersma, van Rijsbergen, Slofstra, Ormel and Burger2018; Hollon et al., Reference Hollon, DeRubeis, Evans, Wiemer, Garvey, Grove and Tuason1992; Nakagawa et al., Reference Nakagawa, Mitsuda, Sado, Abe, Fujisawa, Kikuchi and Ono2017; Vitiello et al., Reference Vitiello, Silva, Rohde, Kratochvil, Kennard, Reinecke and March2009; Watanabe et al., Reference Watanabe, Furukawa, Shimodera, Morokuma, Katsuki, Fujita and Perlis2011) to conduct a random-effects model meta-analysis separately by those adverse outcomes. We are unaware of any studies that examined the effect of combined treatment v. ADM-only on psychiatric ED visits.

Psychotherapy-only v. ADM-only

Thirteen RCTs evaluated the comparative treatment effects of psychotherapy-only v. ADM-only. Thirty-one out of 1030 (3.0%) in the psychotherapy-only arm, and 67 out of 1192 (5.6%) in the ADM-only arm had suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events. This difference was statistically significant (OR 0.45, 95% CI [0.30–0.67], p = 0.001). There was no significant between-study heterogeneity (Q[df = 10] = 7.28, p = 0.699; I 2 = 0.0% [0.0–60.2]; τ 2 = 0 [0.00–1.50], p = 0.700) when comparing psychotherapy-only to ADM-only (Fig. 4). Subgroup analysis revealed that the average treatment effect of lower suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events in psychotherapy-only over ADM-only was statistically significant in youths (OR 0.39 [0.22–0.71]) but not adults (OR 0.54 [0.25–1.18]; Table 2 part C). However, study duration (Table 2 part C), mean age, percentage of females, prior suicide attempts, patients with recurrent MDD, and psychiatric comorbidities (Table 3 part C) were non-significant effect modifiers. All studies within this set of psychotherapy-only v. ADM-only comparisons occurred in outpatient settings.

Figure 4. Forest plot for average treatment effect comparing psychotherapy-only v. ADM-onlya. PSY, psychotherapy; ADM, antidepressant medication; OR, Peto odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; I 2, an index of between-study heterogeneity expressed in a percentage, such that higher values indicated more between-study heterogeneity; τ 2, tau-squared statistic, such that a statistically significant τ 2 indicated substantial between-study variance of the underlying distribution of true effect sizes. aEvents referred to number of patient(s) (if any) within a specific treatment arm that had a negative treatment outcome (i.e. suicide attempt, psychiatric emergency department [ED] visit, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death). The random-effects model only pertained to studies that examined SA as an outcome (Bockting et al., Reference Bockting, Klein, Elgersma, van Rijsbergen, Slofstra, Ormel and Burger2018; Dunlop et al., Reference Dunlop, Polychroniou, Rakofsky, Nemeroff, Craighead and Mayberg2019; Hollon et al., Reference Hollon, DeRubeis, Evans, Wiemer, Garvey, Grove and Tuason1992; Iftene et al., Reference Iftene, Predescu, Stefan and David2015; Lespérance et al., Reference Lespérance, Frasure-Smith, Koszycki, Laliberté, van Zyl, Baker and Guertin2007; March et al., Reference March, Silva, Petrycki, Curry, Wells, Fairbank and Severe2004; March et al., Reference March, Silva, Petrycki, Curry, Wells, Fairbank and Severe2007; Melvin et al., Reference Melvin, Tonge, King, Heyne, Gordon and Klimkeit2006; O'Hara et al., Reference O'Hara, Pearlstein, Stuart, Long, Mills and Zlotnick2019; Rucci et al., Reference Rucci, Frank, Scocco, Calugi, Miniati, Fagiolini and Cassano2011; Vitiello et al., Reference Vitiello, Silva, Rohde, Kratochvil, Kennard, Reinecke and March2009). Too few studies examined psychiatric hospitalization (Browne et al., Reference Browne, Steiner, Roberts, Gafni, Byrne, Dunn and Kraemer2002; Hollon et al., Reference Hollon, DeRubeis, Evans, Wiemer, Garvey, Grove and Tuason1992; O'Hara et al., Reference O'Hara, Pearlstein, Stuart, Long, Mills and Zlotnick2019), and suicide death (Hollon et al., Reference Hollon, DeRubeis, Evans, Wiemer, Garvey, Grove and Tuason1992; Vitiello et al., Reference Vitiello, Silva, Rohde, Kratochvil, Kennard, Reinecke and March2009) to conduct a random-effects model meta-analysis separately by those adverse outcomes. We are unaware of any studies that examined the effect of psychotherapy-only v. ADM-only on psychiatric ED visits.

Publication bias and study quality

Harbord's modified test of small study effects suggested that there was no significant publication bias for the analyses that examined combined treatment v. psychotherapy-only (t = −0.09, degrees of freedom [df] = 10, p = 0.933), combined treatment v. ADM-only (t = −1.76, df = 17, p = 0.096), and psychotherapy-only v. ADM-only (t = 0.14, df = 9, p = 0.88; online Supplementary Fig. S1). Trim-and-fill analyses showed that the comparative treatment effects on decreasing the risk for suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events were significantly better with psychotherapy-only over combined treatment (OR 1.96 [1.20–3.20], p = 0.012; Q[df = 11] = 9.29, p = 0.595), and psychotherapy-only over ADM-only (OR 0.45 [0.30–0.67], p = 0.001; Q[df = 10] = 7.28, p = 0.699), but not combined treatment v. ADM-only (OR 0.76 [0.58–1.00], p = 0.052; Q[df = 21] = 19.03, p = 0.583). In addition, the risk-of-bias plots indicated that most study publication biases were due to missing outcome data (Fig. 5).

Figure 5. Risk-of-bias plots of the comparative effects of ADM-only, psychotherapy-only, and combined treatment. ADM, antidepressant medication; l, low risk of bias; s, some concerns of bias; h, high risk of bias.

Discussion

The present novel meta-analysis consistently observed that psychotherapy monotherapy was superior to combined treatment (1.9% v. 3.7%) and ADM-only (3.0% v. 5.6%) in reducing the probability of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events (i.e. psychiatric ED visits, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death) for MDD patients. The primary meta-analyses indicated that combined treatment was substantially better than ADM-only in decreasing the probability of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events (6.0% v. 8.7%). However, subsequent trim-and-fill sensitivity analyses suggested that this difference was statistically non-significant. Potential accounts for these outcomes were considered in hypothesis-generating instead of confirmatory ways to catalyze more research in this area.

Why was psychotherapy monotherapy better than combined treatment and ADM alone in the entire sample? Notably, these findings concurred with patterns that emerged when MDD treatment remission or response was the dependent variable of interest in other published meta-analyses of RCTs (Cuijpers et al., Reference Cuijpers, Miguel, Harrer, Plessen, Ciharova, Ebert and Karyotaki2023; Furukawa et al., Reference Furukawa, Shinohara, Sahker, Karyotaki, Miguel, Ciharova and Cuijpers2021; Karyotaki et al., Reference Karyotaki, Smit, Holdt Henningsen, Huibers, Robays, de Beurs and Cuijpers2016). These results also aligned with evidence of a medium aggregate effect size on depression symptom reduction in support of psychotherapy combined with treatment-as-usual (mostly pharmacotherapy) compared to psychotherapy alone (van Bronswijk, Moopen, Beijers, Ruhe, & Peeters, Reference van Bronswijk, Moopen, Beijers, Ruhe and Peeters2019). Plausibly, psychotherapy (alone or with ADM), but not ADM-only, equipped depressed patients of various suicide risk levels with essential skills to self-monitor, detect early incipient cues (e.g. feelings of loneliness, suicidal thoughts) of suicide attempts, and intervene effectively by recalling and focusing on reasons for living (e.g. community, family, hobbies, religion; Bakhiyi, Calati, Guillaume, & Courtet, Reference Bakhiyi, Calati, Guillaume and Courtet2016) and harnessing other mood-uplifting strategies (e.g. eliciting social support, engaging in valued activities; Bhar & Brown, Reference Bhar and Brown2012).

Given these findings, future studies should conduct sophisticated instrumental variable complier average causal effects analyses (Hesser, Reference Hesser2020) to determine if differential engagement might mediate the comparative efficacy of psychotherapy-only v. combined treatment and ADM alone on suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events. Exploring other purported mechanisms of change of efficacy of psychotherapy-only v. combined treatment and ADM alone, such as reduced hopelessness (Celano et al., Reference Celano, Beale, Mastromauro, Stewart, Millstein, Auerbach and Huffman2017) and self-focused negative repetitive thinking (Chesin et al., Reference Chesin, Benjamin-Phillips, Keilp, Fertuck, Brodsky and Stanley2016), would also advance clinical psychological and related sciences. The growth of effective digitally delivered suicide-focused psychotherapies (Franz et al., Reference Franz, Mou, Kessler, Stubbing, Jaroszewski, Ray and Nock2022; Torous et al., Reference Torous, Larsen, Depp, Cosco, Barnett, Nock and Firth2018) provides ripe opportunities on these lines of investigation in the near future.

Another noteworthy finding was that the comparative effects of psychotherapy monotherapy over combined treatment and ADM-only in reducing the risk for serious psychiatric adverse events were substantial for children and adolescents instead of adults. These findings aligned with and extended warnings by drug regulators about the risk of ADM to heighten suicide risk, particularly among youths (Sharma, Guski, Freund, & Gotzsche, Reference Sharma, Guski, Freund and Gotzsche2016). Some investigations posit that the maturing brain may exhibit heightened susceptibility to unfavorable drug responses (Andersen & Navalta, Reference Andersen and Navalta2004, Reference Andersen and Navalta2011; Murphy et al., Reference Murphy, Capitao, Giles, Cowen, Stringaris and Harmer2021; Safer & Zito, Reference Safer and Zito2006), with the underlying mechanisms still shrouded in mystery. Alternatively, the linkage with suicidality may stem from the limited effectiveness of ADMs in clinical trials among suicidal children and adolescents, as implied by RCTs, rather than the ADM use directly amplifying suicidality and risks of other serious psychiatric adverse events (Cipriani, Barbui, & Geddes, Reference Cipriani, Barbui and Geddes2005; Dragioti et al., Reference Dragioti, Solmi, Favaro, Fusar-Poli, Dazzan, Thompson and Evangelou2019). Together, findings suggest that understanding the enduring advantages and potential hazards of ADM (alone or combined with psychotherapy) for depressive disorders among youths is paramount.

Conversely, the observation that combined treatment worked better than ADM alone for adults, rather than youths, in reducing the probability of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events is consistent with clinical guidelines that recommend combined treatment for adult patients with high-risk severe v. mild-moderate depression (McQuaid et al., Reference McQuaid, Buelt, Capaldi, Fuller, Issa, Lang and Williams2022). These findings provide indications of ADMs (particularly when combined with psychotherapy) playing a protective role against suicidality in depressed adults (Barbui, Esposito, & Cipriani, Reference Barbui, Esposito and Cipriani2009; Craighead & Dunlop, Reference Craighead and Dunlop2014). However, our observed significant average treatment effect between combined treatment and ADM-only did not remain in the trim-and-fill sensitivity analysis, suggesting that publication bias driven by studies with small sample sizes might have influenced the results. Further, numerous studies indicating an elevated suicide risk associated with ADMs will likely stay unpublished. Overall, these results concurred with placebo-controlled RCTs (Braun et al., Reference Braun, Bschor, Franklin and Baethge2016; Fergusson et al., Reference Fergusson, Doucette, Glass, Shapiro, Healy, Hebert and Hutton2005) and observational studies (Hengartner et al., Reference Hengartner, Amendola, Kaminski, Kindler, Bschor and Ploderl2021) that consistently documented a notable elevation in suicide risk among depressed adult patients treated with ADM-only.

Additionally, the meta-regression analyses showed that higher percentage of females was associated with increased risk of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events in response to ADM alone over combined treatment. Clinically, gender might be an essential consideration since prior meta-analyses showed that, on average, women responded better to psychotherapy (alone or combined with ADM) v. treatment-as-usual than men regarding reduction in depression symptoms (Braun, Gregor, & Tran, Reference Braun, Gregor and Tran2013) and suicide risk (Calati & Courtet, Reference Calati and Courtet2016). Relatedly, growing evidence underscores the heightened risk of repeated suicide attempts among female patients, contrasting with males who frequently choose more lethal means (Corcoran, Keeley, O'Sullivan, & Perry, Reference Corcoran, Keeley, O'Sullivan and Perry2004; Pandey et al., Reference Pandey, Bolstad, Lien, Walby, Myhre and Bramness2022; World Health Organization, 2021). The factors contributing to gender-based variations in treatment effectiveness remain presently uncertain. Nevertheless, there is a paucity of comprehensive investigation into the impact of gender on treatment efficacy on serious psychiatric adverse events, highlighting the necessity for further research in this domain.

Psychiatric comorbidities were also an effect modifier, with higher comorbidities associated with heightened risk of serious psychiatric adverse events in response to ADM-only over combined treatment. These outcomes, coupled with recent meta-analytic evidence on the protective effects of psychotherapies over pharmacotherapies in high-risk subgroups (de la Torre-Luque et al., Reference de la Torre-Luque, Pemau, Ayad-Ahmed, Borges, Fernandez-Sevillano and Garrido-Torres2023; Inagaki et al., Reference Inagaki, Kawashima, Kawanishi, Yonemoto, Sugimoto, Furuno and Yamada2015), suggest that psychotherapy should be prioritized for such patients. Collectively, the number of psychiatric comorbidities might be a salient risk marker concerning the odds of experiencing serious adverse events during and after treatment for depression.

Simultaneously, treatment timing might matter, as we found that combined treatment was more potent than ADM alone in decreasing the likelihood of serious psychiatric adverse events, particularly in studies with follow-up durations of 1.5–5 months rather than 6–60-month follow-ups. This finding extended a prior meta-analysis (Calati & Courtet, Reference Calati and Courtet2016), which showed that treatment duration was not an effect modifier of the effect of combined treatment v. treatment-as-usual. The present meta-analysis did not find evidence for a higher risk of subsequent suicide attempts the more extended the follow-up duration. A growing body of evidence indicates a rising prevalence of suicide attempts during the initial 6 months following a basal episode (Birtwistle, Kelley, House, & Owens, Reference Birtwistle, Kelley, House and Owens2017; Cully et al., Reference Cully, Corcoran, Leahy, Griffin, Dillon, Cassidy and Arensman2019; Liu, Lunde, Jia, & Qin, Reference Liu, Lunde, Jia and Qin2020) and that this timeframe might be the most optimal time to intervene to decrease the risk of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events (Andreoli, Burnand, Frambati, Manning, & Frances, Reference Andreoli, Burnand, Frambati, Manning and Frances2021). Together, these findings might imply the enduring preservation of short-term combined treatment benefits in decreasing suicide risk and improving psychosocial functioning across extended periods.

The current meta-analysis had some limitations. First, the sample size of the current meta-analysis was modest, given the rare nature of the outcome of interest. Such efforts are essential to developing precision treatment models that could guide clinicians to optimize treatment selection for MDD patients (Cohen & DeRubeis, Reference Cohen and DeRubeis2018; Kessler & Luedtke, Reference Kessler and Luedtke2021). Second, more than half of the RCTs included herein did not report on their approaches to handling missing data in their population-level intention-to-treat analyses, i.e. a limitation that future similar RCTs should remedy. Third, Peto ORs could generate biased outcomes in the presence of notable differences in sample sizes of the intervention and comparator arms (Lane, Reference Lane2013). Except for the RCTs by Hollon et al. (Reference Hollon, DeRubeis, Evans, Wiemer, Garvey, Grove and Tuason1992) and Kocsis et al. (Reference Kocsis, Thase, Trivedi, Shelton, Kornstein, Nemeroff and Keller2007), the remaining 32 RCTs had well-balanced sample sizes between the intervention and comparator arms. Fourth, while most pharmacological studies included adverse event data, there was considerable variability in the extent of information provided and heterogeneity in the methods employed for adverse event assessment and analysis (Meister et al., Reference Meister, von Wolff, Mohr, Nestoriuc, Harter, Holzel and Kriston2016). In contrast, psychotherapy studies exhibited a notable dearth in the reporting of adverse event information. In order to enhance the comprehensive reporting of adverse events (including serious ones like suicide attempts examined herein) in published research on psychiatric disorders, researchers must prioritize the meticulous examination of potential harms. Fifth, the sample size was too small to determine if ADM type, such as the prescription of paroxetine in adults (Aursnes, Tvete, Gaasemyr, & Natvig, Reference Aursnes, Tvete, Gaasemyr and Natvig2006) and venlafaxine in youths (Cipriani et al., Reference Cipriani, Zhou, Del Giovane, Hetrick, Qin, Whittington and Xie2016), might be an effect modifier. Relatedly, there was insufficient data to determine how treatment setting (outpatient v. inpatient) might be an effect modifier. Future well-powered studies should examine this since the period following discharge from psychiatric hospitalization entails a heightened suicide risk (Kessler et al., Reference Kessler, Bauer, Bishop, Bossarte, Castro, Demler and Weinstock2023). Despite these limitations, fundamental strengths of the current meta-analysis include its novelty and ability to answer an essential question of how three first-line treatment options for MDD (i.e. psychotherapy and/or ADM) could reduce the risk of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events.

To conclude, the present meta-analysis consistently found that psychotherapy monotherapy had stronger aggregate effects than combined treatment (1.9% v. 3.7%) and ADM-only (3.0% v. 5.6%) in decreasing the probability of suicide attempt, psychiatric ED visit, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death for MDD patients. The observation that combined treatment had better aggregate effect compared to ADM alone to reduce the likelihood of suicide attempts and other psychiatric events (6.0% v. 8.7%) did not consistently surpass the statistical significance threshold. On average, psychotherapies, especially those that integrate cognitive-behavioral and related theories, appear to be the best first-line intervention option to mitigate the risk of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events in depressed youth and adult populations. Therapists should be cognizant of the absence of conclusive evidence, based on RCTs, regarding the preventive efficacy of ADM monotherapy in mitigating the risk of suicide attempts and other serious psychiatric adverse events, in contrast to prominent assertations (Dragioti et al., Reference Dragioti, Solmi, Favaro, Fusar-Poli, Dazzan, Thompson and Evangelou2019). Further, our data underscore the importance of discouraging the routine prescription of ADMs (alone or combined with psychotherapy) for pediatric and adolescent populations, except perhaps for sertraline. Meta-analytic data of placebo-controlled RCTs suggested no increased suicide risk and superior comparative efficacy regarding remission rates with sertraline prescribed to depressed youths (Cipriani et al., Reference Cipriani, Zhou, Del Giovane, Hetrick, Qin, Whittington and Xie2016). The benefits of utilizing ADMs in adults and older populations, especially in conjunction with psychotherapy, may outweigh manageable safety concerns, considering their effectiveness in addressing a range of psychiatric disorders, including MDD (Calati & Courtet, Reference Calati and Courtet2016; Craighead & Dunlop, Reference Craighead and Dunlop2014). Future similar comparative effectiveness research investigating these rare events as the dependent variable of interest could also build on the current meta-analysis by using large, less difficult-to-obtain prospective observational datasets to evaluate aggregate effects (i.e. trial emulation studies; Hernan & Robins, Reference Hernan and Robins2016) as a precursor to developing individualized treatment rules for optimizing treatment allocation using RCT designs (Kessler & Luedtke, Reference Kessler and Luedtke2021).

Supplementary material

The supplementary material for this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291723003306

Competing interests

None.

References

Andersen, S. L., & Navalta, C. P. (2004). Altering the course of neurodevelopment: A framework for understanding the enduring effects of psychotropic drugs. International Journal of Developmental Neuroscience, 22, 423440. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdevneu.2004.06.002Google Scholar
Andersen, S. L., & Navalta, C. P. (2011). Annual research review: New frontiers in developmental neuropharmacology: Can long-term therapeutic effects of drugs be optimized through carefully timed early intervention? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 52, 476503. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02376.xGoogle Scholar
Andreoli, A., Burnand, Y., Frambati, L., Manning, D., & Frances, A. (2021). Abandonment psychotherapy and psychosocial functioning among suicidal patients with borderline personality disorder: A 3-year naturalistic follow-up. Journal of Personality Disorders, 35, 7383. doi: 10.1521/pedi_2019_33_423Google Scholar
Aursnes, I., Tvete, I. F., Gaasemyr, J., & Natvig, B. (2006). Even more suicide attempts in clinical trials with paroxetine randomised against placebo. BMC Psychiatry, 6, 5557. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-6-55Google Scholar
Bakhiyi, C. L., Calati, R., Guillaume, S., & Courtet, P. (2016). Do reasons for living protect against suicidal thoughts and behaviors? A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 77, 92108. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2016.02.019Google Scholar
Balduzzi, S., Rucker, G., & Schwarzer, G. (2019). How to perform a meta-analysis with R: A practical tutorial. Evidence-Based Mental Health, 22, 153160. doi: 10.1136/ebmental-2019-300117Google Scholar
Barbui, C., Esposito, E., & Cipriani, A. (2009). Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and risk of suicide: A systematic review of observational studies. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 180, 291297. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.081514Google Scholar
Bernstein, G. A., Borchardt, C. M., Perwien, A. R., Crosby, R. D., Kushner, M. G., Thuras, P. D., & Last, C. G. (2000). Imipramine plus cognitive-behavioral therapy in the treatment of school refusal. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 39, 276283. doi: 10.1097/00004583-200003000-00008Google Scholar
Bhar, S. S., & Brown, G. K. (2012). Treatment of depression and suicide in older adults. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 19, 116125. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpra.2010.12.005Google Scholar
Birtwistle, J., Kelley, R., House, A., & Owens, D. (2017). Combination of self-harm methods and fatal and non-fatal repetition: A cohort study. Journal of Affective Disorders, 218, 188194. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.04.027Google Scholar
Bockting, C. L. H., Klein, N. S., Elgersma, H. J., van Rijsbergen, G. D., Slofstra, C., Ormel, J., … Burger, H. (2018). Effectiveness of preventive cognitive therapy while tapering antidepressants versus maintenance antidepressant treatment versus their combination in prevention of depressive relapse or recurrence (DRD study): A three-group, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet. Psychiatry, 5, 401410. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(18)30100-7Google Scholar
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. doi: 10.1002/9780470743386.ch7Google Scholar
Bradburn, M. J., Deeks, J. J., Berlin, J. A., & Russell Localio, A. (2007). Much ado about nothing: A comparison of the performance of meta-analytical methods with rare events. Statistics in Medicine, 26, 5377. doi: 10.1002/sim.2528Google Scholar
Braun, C., Bschor, T., Franklin, J., & Baethge, C. (2016). Suicides and suicide attempts during long-term treatment with antidepressants: A meta-analysis of 29 placebo-controlled studies including 6934 patients with major depressive disorder. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 85, 171179. doi: 10.1159/000442293Google Scholar
Braun, S. R., Gregor, B., & Tran, U. S. (2013). Comparing bona fide psychotherapies of depression in adults with two meta-analytical approaches. PLoS ONE, 8, e68135. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0068135Google Scholar
Brent, D. A., Emslie, G. J., Clarke, G. N., Asarnow, J., Spirito, A., Ritz, L., … Keller, M. B. (2009). Predictors of spontaneous and systematically assessed suicidal adverse events in the treatment of SSRI-resistant depression in adolescents (TORDIA) study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 166, 418426. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.08070976Google Scholar
Briggs, S., Netuveli, G., Gould, N., Gkaravella, A., Gluckman, N. S., Kangogyere, P., … Lindner, R. (2019). The effectiveness of psychoanalytic/psychodynamic psychotherapy for reducing suicide attempts and self-harm: Systematic review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Psychiatry, 214, 320328. doi: 10.1192/bjp.2019.33Google Scholar
Browne, G., Steiner, M., Roberts, J., Gafni, A., Byrne, C., Dunn, E., … Kraemer, J. (2002). Sertraline and/or interpersonal psychotherapy for patients with dysthymic disorder in primary care: 6-month comparison with longitudinal 2-year follow-up of effectiveness and costs. Journal of Affective Disorders, 68, 317330. doi: 10.1016/S0165-0327(01)00343-3Google Scholar
Calati, R., & Courtet, P. (2016). Is psychotherapy effective for reducing suicide attempt and non-suicidal self-injury rates? Meta-analysis and meta-regression of literature data. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 79, 820. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2016.04.003Google Scholar
Celano, C. M., Beale, E. E., Mastromauro, C. A., Stewart, J. G., Millstein, R. A., Auerbach, R. P., … Huffman, J. C. (2017). Psychological interventions to reduce suicidality in high-risk patients with major depression: A randomized controlled trial. Psychological Medicine, 47, 810821. doi: 10.1017/S0033291716002798Google Scholar
Chesin, M. S., Benjamin-Phillips, C. A., Keilp, J., Fertuck, E. A., Brodsky, B. S., & Stanley, B. (2016). Improvements in executive attention, rumination, cognitive reactivity, and mindfulness among high-suicide risk patients participating in adjunct mindfulness-based cognitive therapy: Preliminary findings. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 22, 642649. doi: 10.1089/acm.2015.0351Google Scholar
Chiu, C. C., Liu, H. C., Li, W. H., Tsai, S. Y., Chen, C. C., & Kuo, C. J. (2023). Incidence, risk and protective factors for suicide mortality among patients with major depressive disorder. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 80, 103399. doi: 10.1016/j.ajp.2022.103399Google Scholar
Cipriani, A., Barbui, C., & Geddes, J. R. (2005). Suicide, depression, and antidepressants. BMJ, 330, 373374. doi: 10.1136/bmj.330.7488.373Google Scholar
Cipriani, A., Zhou, X., Del Giovane, C., Hetrick, S. E., Qin, B., Whittington, C., … Xie, P. (2016). Comparative efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants for major depressive disorder in children and adolescents: A network meta-analysis. Lancet, 388, 881890. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30385-3Google Scholar
Cohen, Z. D., & DeRubeis, R. J. (2018). Treatment selection in depression. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 14, 209236. doi: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050817-084746Google Scholar
Corcoran, P., Keeley, H. S., O'Sullivan, M., & Perry, I. J. (2004). The incidence and repetition of attempted suicide in Ireland. European Journal of Public Health, 14, 1923. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/14.1.19Google Scholar
Cornelius, J. R., Bukstein, O. G., Wood, D. S., Kirisci, L., Douaihy, A., & Clark, D. B. (2009). Double-blind placebo-controlled trial of fluoxetine in adolescents with comorbid major depression and an alcohol use disorder. Addictive Behaviors, 34, 905909. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2009.03.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craighead, W. E., & Dunlop, B. W. (2014). Combination psychotherapy and antidepressant medication treatment for depression: For whom, when, and how. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 267300. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.121208.131653Google Scholar
Cuijpers, P., Miguel, C., Harrer, M., Plessen, C. Y., Ciharova, M., Ebert, D., & Karyotaki, E. (2023). Cognitive behavior therapy vs. Control conditions, other psychotherapies, pharmacotherapies and combined treatment for depression: A comprehensive meta-analysis including 409 trials with 52,702 patients. World Psychiatry, 22, 105115. doi: 10.1002/wps.21069Google Scholar
Cully, G., Corcoran, P., Leahy, D., Griffin, E., Dillon, C., Cassidy, E., … Arensman, E. (2019). Method of self-harm and risk of self-harm repetition: Findings from a national self-harm registry. Journal of Affective Disorders, 246, 843850. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2018.10.372Google Scholar
Davey, C. G., Chanen, A. M., Hetrick, S. E., Cotton, S. M., Ratheesh, A., Amminger, G. P., … Berk, M. (2019). The addition of fluoxetine to cognitive behavioural therapy for youth depression (YoDA-C): A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre clinical trial. The Lancet. Psychiatry, 6, 735744. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(19)30215-9Google Scholar
de la Torre-Luque, A., Pemau, A., Ayad-Ahmed, W., Borges, G., Fernandez-Sevillano, J., Garrido-Torres, N., … Consortium, S. (2023). Risk of suicide attempt repetition after an index attempt: A systematic review and meta-analysis. General Hospital Psychiatry, 81, 5156. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2023.01.007Google Scholar
Deas, D., Randall, C. L., Roberts, J. S., & Anton, R. F. (2000). A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of sertraline in depressed adolescent alcoholics: A pilot study. Human Psychopharmacology, 15, 461469. doi: 10.1002/1099-1077(200008)15:6<461::Aid-hup209>3.0.Co;2-jGoogle Scholar
Deeks, J. J., Higgins, J. P. T., & Altman, D. G. (2019). Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In J. P. T., Higgins, J, Thomas., J, Chandler., M., Cumpston, T., Li, M. J., Page, & V. A., Welch (Eds.), Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (2nd, pp. 243296). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. doi: 10.1002/9781119536604.ch10Google Scholar
Dragioti, E., Solmi, M., Favaro, A., Fusar-Poli, P., Dazzan, P., Thompson, T., … Evangelou, E. (2019). Association of antidepressant use with adverse health outcomes: A systematic umbrella review. JAMA Psychiatry, 76, 12411255. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.2859Google Scholar
Dunlop, B. W., Polychroniou, P. E., Rakofsky, J. J., Nemeroff, C. B., Craighead, W. E., & Mayberg, H. S. (2019). Suicidal ideation and other persisting symptoms after CBT or antidepressant medication treatment for major depressive disorder. Psychological Medicine, 49, 18691878. doi: 10.1017/S0033291718002568Google Scholar
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000). Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics, 56, 455463. doi: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.xGoogle Scholar
Fergusson, D., Doucette, S., Glass, K. C., Shapiro, S., Healy, D., Hebert, P., & Hutton, B. (2005). Association between suicide attempts and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ, 330, 396. doi: 10.1136/bmj.330.7488.396Google Scholar
Franz, P. J., Mou, D., Kessler, D. T., Stubbing, J., Jaroszewski, A. C., Ray, S., … Nock, M. K. (2022). Digital bibliotherapy as a scalable intervention for suicidal thoughts: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 90, 626637. doi: 10.1037/ccp0000752Google Scholar
Friedrich, J. O., Adhikari, N. K., & Beyene, J. (2007). Inclusion of zero total event trials in meta-analyses maintains analytic consistency and incorporates all available data. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 7, 5. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-7-5Google Scholar
Furukawa, T. A., Shinohara, K., Sahker, E., Karyotaki, E., Miguel, C., Ciharova, M., … Cuijpers, P. (2021). Initial treatment choices to achieve sustained response in major depression: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. World Psychiatry, 20, 387396. doi: 10.1002/wps.20906Google Scholar
GBD 2017 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators (2018). Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. The Lancet, 392, 17891858. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32279-7Google Scholar
Goodyer, I., Dubicka, B., Wilkinson, P., Kelvin, R., Roberts, C., Byford, S., … Harrington, R. (2007). Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and routine specialist care with and without cognitive behaviour therapy in adolescents with major depression: Randomised controlled trial. British Medical Journal, 335, 142. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39224.494340.55Google Scholar
Gotzsche, P. C., & Gotzsche, P. K. (2017). Cognitive behavioural therapy halves the risk of repeated suicide attempts: Systematic review. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 110, 404410. doi: 10.1177/0141076817731904Google Scholar
Greenberg, P. E., Fournier, A. A., Sisitsky, T., Simes, M., Berman, R., Koenigsberg, S. H., & Kessler, R. C. (2021). The economic burden of adults with major depressive disorder in the United States (2010 and 2018). Pharmacoeconomics, 39, 653665. doi: 10.1007/s40273-021-01019-4Google Scholar
Harbord, R. M., Egger, M., & Sterne, J. A. (2006). A modified test for small-study effects in meta-analyses of controlled trials with binary endpoints. Statistics in Medicine, 25, 34433457. doi: 10.1002/sim.2380CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hengartner, M. P., Amendola, S., Kaminski, J. A., Kindler, S., Bschor, T., & Ploderl, M. (2021). Suicide risk with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and other new-generation antidepressants in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 75, 523530. doi: 10.1136/jech-2020-214611Google Scholar
Hernan, M. A., & Robins, J. M. (2016). Using big data to emulate a target trial when a randomized trial is not available. American Journal of Epidemiology, 183, 758764. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwv254Google Scholar
Hesser, H. (2020). Estimating causal effects of internet interventions in the context of nonadherence. Internet Interventions, 21, 100346. doi: 10.1016/j.invent.2020.100346Google Scholar
Higgins, J. P. T., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Jüni, P., Moher, D., Oxman, A. D., … Sterne, J. A. C. (2011). The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ, 343, d5928. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d5928Google Scholar
Hohls, J. K., Konig, H. H., & Hajek, A. (2023). Trajectories of generalized anxiety disorder, major depression and change in quality of life in adults aged 50+: Findings from a longitudinal analysis using representative, population-based data from Ireland. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 58, 12011211. doi: 10.1007/s00127-022-02373-0Google Scholar
Hollon, S. D., DeRubeis, R. J., Evans, M. D., Wiemer, M. J., Garvey, M. J., Grove, W. M., & Tuason, V. B. (1992). Cognitive therapy and pharmacotherapy for depression. Singly and in combination. JAMA Psychiatry, 49, 774781. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1992.01820100018004Google Scholar
Huijbers, M. J., Spinhoven, P., Spijker, J., Ruhe, H. G., van Schaik, D. J., van Oppen, P., … Speckens, A. E. (2015). Adding mindfulness-based cognitive therapy to maintenance antidepressant medication for prevention of relapse/recurrence in major depressive disorder: Randomised controlled trial. Journal of Affective Disorders, 187, 5461. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2015.08.023CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iftene, F., Predescu, E., Stefan, S., & David, D. (2015). Rational-emotive and cognitive-behavior therapy (REBT/CBT) versus pharmacotherapy versus REBT/CBT plus pharmacotherapy in the treatment of major depressive disorder in youth; a randomized clinical trial. Psychiatry Research, 225, 687694. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.11.021Google Scholar
Inagaki, M., Kawashima, Y., Kawanishi, C., Yonemoto, N., Sugimoto, T., Furuno, T., … Yamada, M. (2015). Interventions to prevent repeat suicidal behavior in patients admitted to an emergency department for a suicide attempt: A meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 175, 6678. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2014.12.048Google Scholar
Karyotaki, E., Smit, Y., Holdt Henningsen, K., Huibers, M. J., Robays, J., de Beurs, D., & Cuijpers, P. (2016). Combining pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy or monotherapy for major depression? A meta-analysis on the long-term effects. Journal of Affective Disorders, 194, 144152. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2016.01.036Google Scholar
Kennard, B. D., Emslie, G. J., Mayes, T. L., Nakonezny, P. A., Jones, J. M., Foxwell, A. A., & King, J. (2014). Sequential treatment with fluoxetine and relapse – prevention CBT to improve outcomes in pediatric depression. American Journal of Psychiatry, 171, 10831090. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2014.13111460Google Scholar
Kessler, R. C., Bauer, M. S., Bishop, T. M., Bossarte, R. M., Castro, V. M., Demler, O. V., … Weinstock, L. M. (2023). Evaluation of a model to target high-risk psychiatric inpatients for an intensive postdischarge suicide prevention intervention. JAMA Psychiatry, 80, 230240. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2022.4634Google Scholar
Kessler, R. C., & Luedtke, A. (2021). Pragmatic precision psychiatry – a new direction for optimizing treatment selection. JAMA Psychiatry, 78, 13841390. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.2500Google Scholar
Khazanov, G. K., Xu, C., Hollon, S. D., DeRubeis, R. J., & Thase, M. E. (2021). Adding cognitive therapy to antidepressant medications decreases suicidal ideation. Journal of Affective Disorders, 281, 183191. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.12.032Google Scholar
Kocsis, J. H., Thase, M. E., Trivedi, M. H., Shelton, R. C., Kornstein, S. G., Nemeroff, C. B., … Keller, M. B. (2007). Prevention of recurrent episodes of depression with venlafaxine ER in a 1-year maintenance phase from the PREVENT study. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 68, 10141023. doi: 10.4088/jcp.v68n0706Google Scholar
Kothgassner, O. D., Robinson, K., Goreis, A., Ougrin, D., & Plener, P. L. (2020). Does treatment method matter? A meta-analysis of the past 20 years of research on therapeutic interventions for self-harm and suicidal ideation in adolescents. Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation, 7, 9. doi: 10.1186/s40479-020-00123-9Google Scholar
Kupferberg, A., Bicks, L., & Hasler, G. (2016). Social functioning in major depressive disorder. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 69, 313332. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.07.002Google Scholar
Kuyken, W., Byford, S., Taylor, R. S., Watkins, E., Holden, E., White, K., … Teasdale, J. D. (2008). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy to prevent relapse in recurrent depression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76, 966978. doi: 10.1037/a0013786Google Scholar
Kuyken, W., Hayes, R., Barrett, B., Byng, R., Dalgleish, T., Kessler, D., … Byford, S. (2015). Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy compared with maintenance antidepressant treatment in the prevention of depressive relapse or recurrence (PREVENT): A randomised controlled trial. The Lancet, 386, 6373. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62222-4Google Scholar
Lam, R. W., Parikh, S. V., Ramasubbu, R., Michalak, E. E., Tam, E. M., Axler, A., … Manjunath, C. V. (2013). Effects of combined pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy for improving work functioning in major depressive disorder. British Journal of Psychiatry, 203, 358365. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.112.125237Google Scholar
Lane, P. W. (2013). Meta-analysis of incidence of rare events. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 22, 117132. doi: 10.1177/0962280211432218Google Scholar
Lespérance, F., Frasure-Smith, N., Koszycki, D., Laliberté, M. A., van Zyl, L. T., Baker, B., … Guertin, M. C. (2007). Effects of citalopram and interpersonal psychotherapy on depression in patients with coronary artery disease: The Canadian Cardiac Randomized Evaluation of Antidepressant and Psychotherapy Efficacy (CREATE) trial. JAMA, 297, 367379. doi: 10.1001/jama.297.4.367Google Scholar
Liu, B. P., Lunde, K. B., Jia, C. X., & Qin, P. (2020). The short-term rate of non-fatal and fatal repetition of deliberate self-harm: A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Journal of Affective Disorders, 273, 597603. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.05.072Google Scholar
Mandoki, M. W., Tapia, M. R., Tapia, M. A., Sumner, G. S., & Parker, J. L. (1997). Venlafaxine in the treatment of children and adolescents with major depression. Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 33, 149154.Google Scholar
March, J. S., Silva, S., Petrycki, S., Curry, J., Wells, K., Fairbank, J., … Severe, J. (2004). Fluoxetine, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and their combination for adolescents with depression: Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study (TADS) randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 292, 807820. doi: 10.1001/jama.292.7.807Google Scholar
March, J. S., Silva, S., Petrycki, S., Curry, J., Wells, K., Fairbank, J., … Severe, J. (2007). The Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study (TADS): Long-term effectiveness and safety outcomes. Archives of General Psychiatry, 64, 11321143. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.64.10.1132Google Scholar
McGuinness, L. A., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2020). Risk-Of-Bias VISualization (robvis): An R package and Shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments. Research Synthesis Methods, 12, 5561. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1411Google Scholar
McQuaid, J. R., Buelt, A., Capaldi, V., Fuller, M., Issa, F., Lang, A. E., … Williams, S. (2022). The management of major depressive disorder: Synopsis of the 2022 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense clinical practice guideline. Annals of Internal Medicine, 175, 14401451. doi: 10.7326/M22-1603Google Scholar
Meister, R., von Wolff, A., Mohr, H., Nestoriuc, Y., Harter, M., Holzel, L., & Kriston, L. (2016). Adverse event methods were heterogeneous and insufficiently reported in randomized trials on persistent depressive disorder. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 71, 97108. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.10.007Google Scholar
Melvin, G. A., Tonge, B. J., King, N. J., Heyne, D., Gordon, M. S., & Klimkeit, E. (2006). A comparison of cognitive-behavioral therapy, sertraline, and their combination for adolescent depression. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 45, 11511161. doi: 10.1097/01.chi.0000233157.21925.71Google Scholar
Michel, K., Gysin-Maillart, A., Breit, S., Walther, S., & Pavlidou, A. (2021). Psychopharmacological treatment is not associated with reduced suicide ideation and reattempts in an observational follow-up study of suicide attempters. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 140, 180186. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2021.05.068Google Scholar
Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., … Group, P.-P. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews, 4, 1. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1Google Scholar
Murphy, S. E., Capitao, L. P., Giles, S. L. C., Cowen, P. J., Stringaris, A., & Harmer, C. J. (2021). The knowns and unknowns of SSRI treatment in young people with depression and anxiety: Efficacy, predictors, and mechanisms of action. The Lancet. Psychiatry, 8, 824835. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(21)00154-1Google Scholar
Nakagawa, A., Mitsuda, D., Sado, M., Abe, T., Fujisawa, D., Kikuchi, T., … Ono, Y. (2017). Effectiveness of supplementary cognitive-behavioral therapy for pharmacotherapy-resistant depression: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 78, 11261135. doi: 10.4088/JCP.15m10511Google Scholar
O'Hara, M. W., Pearlstein, T., Stuart, S., Long, J. D., Mills, J. A., & Zlotnick, C. (2019). A placebo controlled treatment trial of sertraline and interpersonal psychotherapy for postpartum depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 245, 524532. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2018.10.361Google Scholar
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71Google Scholar
Pandey, S., Bolstad, I., Lien, L., Walby, F. A., Myhre, M. O., & Bramness, J. G. (2022). Sex-specific factors associated with lifetime suicide attempt among patients with alcohol use disorders. BJPsych Open, 8, e135. doi: 10.1192/bjo.2022.545Google Scholar
Peters, J. L., Sutton, A. J., Jones, D. R., Abrams, K. R., & Rushton, L. (2006). Comparison of two methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. JAMA, 295, 676680. doi: 10.1001/jama.295.6.676Google Scholar
Peters, J. L., Sutton, A. J., Jones, D. R., Abrams, K. R., & Rushton, L. (2008). Contour-enhanced meta-analysis funnel plots help distinguish publication bias from other causes of asymmetry. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61, 991996. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.010CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riblet, N. B. V., Shiner, B., Young-Xu, Y., & Watts, B. V. (2017). Strategies to prevent death by suicide: Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. British Journal of Psychiatry, 210, 396402. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.116.187799Google Scholar
Riggs, P. D., Mikulich-Gilbertson, S. K., Davies, R. D., Lohman, M., Klein, C., & Stover, S. K. (2007). A randomized controlled trial of fluoxetine and cognitive behavioral therapy in adolescents with major depression, behavior problems, and substance use disorders. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 161, 10261034. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.161.11.1026Google Scholar
Rosen, L., Manor, O., Engelhard, D., & Zucker, D. (2006). In defense of the randomized controlled trial for health promotion research. American Journal of Public Health, 96, 11811186. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.061713Google Scholar
Rucci, P., Frank, E., Scocco, P., Calugi, S., Miniati, M., Fagiolini, A., & Cassano, G. B. (2011). Treatment-emergent suicidal ideation during 4 months of acute management of unipolar major depression with SSRI pharmacotherapy or interpersonal psychotherapy in a randomized clinical trial. Depression and Anxiety, 28, 303309. doi: 10.1002/da.20758Google Scholar
Safer, D. J., & Zito, J. M. (2006). Treatment-emergent adverse events from selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors by age group: Children versus adolescents. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, 16, 159169. doi: 10.1089/cap.2006.16.159Google Scholar
Schramm, E., van Calker, D., Dykierek, P., Lieb, K., Kech, S., Zobel, I., … Berger, M. (2007). An intensive treatment program of interpersonal psychotherapy plus pharmacotherapy for depressed inpatients: Acute and long-term results. American Journal of Psychiatry, 164, 768777. doi: 10.1176/ajp.2007.164.5.768Google Scholar
Sharma, T., Guski, L. S., Freund, N., & Gotzsche, P. C. (2016). Suicidality and aggression during antidepressant treatment: Systematic review and meta-analyses based on clinical study reports. BMJ, 352, i65. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i65Google Scholar
Sweeting, M. J., Sutton, A. J., & Lambert, P. C. (2004). What to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta-analysis of sparse data. Statistics in Medicine, 23, 13511375. doi: 10.1002/sim.1761Google Scholar
Szumilas, M. (2010). Explaining odds ratios. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 19, 227229.Google Scholar
Torous, J., Larsen, M. E., Depp, C., Cosco, T. D., Barnett, I., Nock, M. K., & Firth, J. (2018). Smartphones, sensors, and machine learning to advance real-time prediction and interventions for suicide prevention: A review of current progress and next steps. Current Psychiatry Reports, 20, 51. doi: 10.1007/s11920-018-0914-yGoogle Scholar
van Bronswijk, S., Moopen, N., Beijers, L., Ruhe, H. G., & Peeters, F. (2019). Effectiveness of psychotherapy for treatment-resistant depression: A meta-analysis and meta-regression. Psychological Medicine, 49, 366379. doi: 10.1017/S003329171800199XGoogle Scholar
Vitiello, B., Silva, S. G., Rohde, P., Kratochvil, C. J., Kennard, B. D., Reinecke, M. A., … March, J. S. (2009). Suicidal events in the Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study (TADS). Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 70, 741747. doi: 10.4088/jcp.08m04607Google Scholar
Vitriol, V. G., Ballesteros, S. T., Florenzano, R. U., Weil, K. P., & Benadof, D. F. (2009). Evaluation of an outpatient intervention for women with severe depression and a history of childhood trauma. Psychiatric Services, 60, 936942. doi: 10.1176/ps.2009.60.7.936Google Scholar
Watanabe, N., Furukawa, T. A., Shimodera, S., Morokuma, I., Katsuki, F., Fujita, H., … Perlis, M. L. (2011). Brief behavioral therapy for refractory insomnia in residual depression: An assessor-blind, randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 72, 16511658. doi: 10.4088/JCP.10m06130gryGoogle Scholar
Wei, S., Liu, L., Bi, B., Li, H., Hou, J., Tan, S., … Liu, Y. (2013). An intervention and follow-up study following a suicide attempt in the emergency departments of four general hospitals in Shenyang, China. Crisis, 34, 107115. doi: 10.1027/0227-5910/a000181Google Scholar
Weitz, E., Hollon, S. D., Kerkhof, A., & Cuijpers, P. (2014). Do depression treatments reduce suicidal ideation? The effects of CBT, IPT, pharmacotherapy, and placebo on suicidality. Journal of Affective Disorders, 167, 98103. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2014.05.036Google Scholar
Wilkinson, P., Kelvin, R., Roberts, C., Dubicka, B., & Goodyer, I. (2011). Clinical and psychosocial predictors of suicide attempts and nonsuicidal self-injury in the Adolescent Depression Antidepressants and Psychotherapy Trial (ADAPT). American Journal of Psychiatry, 168, 495501. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2010.10050718Google Scholar
World Health Organization (2021). Suicide worldwide in 2019: Global health estimates. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
Zainal, N. H., & Newman, M. G. (2022). Inflammation mediates depression and generalized anxiety symptoms predicting executive function impairment after 18 years. Journal of Affective Disorders, 296, 465475. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2021.08.077Google Scholar
Zobel, I., Kech, S., van Calker, D., Dykierek, P., Berger, M., Schneibel, R., & Schramm, E. (2011). Long-term effect of combined interpersonal psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy in a randomized trial of depressed patients. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 123, 276282. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2010.01671.xGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram. PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; RCT, randomized controlled trial; ADM, antidepressant medication; PSY, psychotherapy; SA, suicide attempt.

Figure 1

Table 1. Summary of RCTs that examined comparative average treatment effect (ATE) of antidepressant medication (ADM) and/or psychotherapy (PSY) predicting suicide attempt (SAs), psychiatric emergency department (ED) visit, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death

Figure 2

Figure 2. Forest plot for average treatment effect comparing combined treatment v. psychotherapy-onlya. ADM, antidepressant medication; PSY, psychotherapy; OR, Peto odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; I2, an index of between-study heterogeneity expressed in a percentage, such that higher values indicated more between-study heterogeneity; τ2, tau-squared statistic, such that a statistically significant τ2 indicated substantial between-study variance of the underlying distribution of true effect sizes. aEvents referred to the number of patient(s) (if any) within a specific treatment arm that had a negative treatment outcome (i.e. suicide attempt [SA], psychiatric emergency department [ED] visit, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death). The random-effects model only pertained to studies that examined SA as an outcome (Bockting et al., 2018; Cornelius et al., 2009; Davey et al., 2019; Deas et al., 2000; Hollon et al., 1992; Iftene et al., 2015; Khazanov et al., 2021; Kuyken et al., 2008; Kuyken et al., 2015; Lespérance et al., 2007; March et al., 2004; March et al., 2007; Melvin et al., 2006; Vitiello et al., 2009; Vitriol et al., 2009). There were too few studies that examined psychiatric ED visit (Riggs et al., 2007), psychiatric hospitalization (Browne et al., 2002; Hollon et al., 1992; Huijbers et al., 2015), and suicide death (Bockting et al., 2018; Hollon et al., 1992; Kuyken et al., 2015; Vitiello et al., 2009) to conduct a random-effects model meta-analysis separately by those adverse outcomes.

Figure 3

Table 2. Subgroup analysis

Figure 4

Table 3. Meta-regression analysis

Figure 5

Figure 3. Forest plot for average treatment effect comparing combined treatment v. ADM-onlya. ADM, antidepressant medication; PSY, psychotherapy; OR, Peto odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; I2, an index of between-study heterogeneity expressed in a percentage, such that higher values indicated more between-study heterogeneity; τ2, tau-squared statistic, such that a statistically significant τ2 indicated substantial between-study variance of the underlying distribution of true effect sizes. aEvents referred to number of patient(s) (if any) within a specific treatment arm that had a negative treatment outcome (i.e. suicide attempt, psychiatric emergency department [ED] visits, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death). The random-effects model only pertained to studies that examined SA as an outcome (Bockting et al., 2018; Brent et al., 2009; Goodyer et al., 2007; Hollon et al., 1992; Iftene et al., 2015; Kennard et al., 2014; Khazanov et al., 2021; Kocsis et al., 2007; Lespérance et al., 2007; March et al., 2004; March et al., 2007; Melvin et al., 2006; Michel et al., 2021; Schramm et al., 2007; Vitiello et al., 2009; Wei et al., 2013; Wilkinson et al., 2011). There were too few studies that examined psychiatric hospitalization (Browne et al., 2002; Hollon et al., 1992; Kennard et al., 2014; Mandoki et al., 1997; Nakagawa et al., 2017; Schramm et al., 2007) and suicide death (Bockting et al., 2018; Hollon et al., 1992; Nakagawa et al., 2017; Vitiello et al., 2009; Watanabe et al., 2011) to conduct a random-effects model meta-analysis separately by those adverse outcomes. We are unaware of any studies that examined the effect of combined treatment v. ADM-only on psychiatric ED visits.

Figure 6

Figure 4. Forest plot for average treatment effect comparing psychotherapy-only v. ADM-onlya. PSY, psychotherapy; ADM, antidepressant medication; OR, Peto odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; I2, an index of between-study heterogeneity expressed in a percentage, such that higher values indicated more between-study heterogeneity; τ2, tau-squared statistic, such that a statistically significant τ2 indicated substantial between-study variance of the underlying distribution of true effect sizes. aEvents referred to number of patient(s) (if any) within a specific treatment arm that had a negative treatment outcome (i.e. suicide attempt, psychiatric emergency department [ED] visit, psychiatric hospitalization, and/or suicide death). The random-effects model only pertained to studies that examined SA as an outcome (Bockting et al., 2018; Dunlop et al., 2019; Hollon et al., 1992; Iftene et al., 2015; Lespérance et al., 2007; March et al., 2004; March et al., 2007; Melvin et al., 2006; O'Hara et al., 2019; Rucci et al., 2011; Vitiello et al., 2009). Too few studies examined psychiatric hospitalization (Browne et al., 2002; Hollon et al., 1992; O'Hara et al., 2019), and suicide death (Hollon et al., 1992; Vitiello et al., 2009) to conduct a random-effects model meta-analysis separately by those adverse outcomes. We are unaware of any studies that examined the effect of psychotherapy-only v. ADM-only on psychiatric ED visits.

Figure 7

Figure 5. Risk-of-bias plots of the comparative effects of ADM-only, psychotherapy-only, and combined treatment. ADM, antidepressant medication; l, low risk of bias; s, some concerns of bias; h, high risk of bias.

Supplementary material: File

S0033291723003306sup001.docx

Zainal supplementary material

Download S0033291723003306sup001.docx(File)
File 213 KB