Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Given the high prevalence of mental health disorders and their significant socioeconomic burden, there is a need to develop improved treatments, and to evaluate them through placebo-controlled trials. However, the magnitude of the placebo response in randomised controlled trials to test medications may be substantial, affecting their interpretation. Therefore, improved understanding of the patient, trial and mental disorder factors that influence placebo responses would inform clinical trial design to better detect active treatment effects. There is a growing literature exploring the placebo response within specific mental health disorders, but no overarching synthesis of this research has been produced to date. We present a protocol for an umbrella review of systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses in which we aim to understand the effect size and potential predictors of placebo response within, and across, mental health disorders. METHODS AND ANALYSIS/METHODS:We will systematically search databases (Medline, PsycINFO, EMBASE+EMBASE Classic, Web of Knowledge) for systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses that report placebo effect size in clinical trials in patients with mental health disorders (initial search date 23 October 2022). Screening of abstracts and full texts will be done in pairs. We will extract data to qualitatively examine how placebo effect size varies across mental health disorders. We also plan to qualitatively summarise predictors of increased placebo response identified either quantitatively (eg, through meta-regression) or qualitatively. Risk of bias will be assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool. We aim to not only summarise the current literature but also to identify gaps in knowledge and generate further hypotheses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION/BACKGROUND:We do not believe there are any specific ethical considerations relevant to this study. We will publish the results in a peer-reviewed journal.

Prior studies reported mixed effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of children and adolescents with ADHD, but they were mainly cross-sectional and without controls. To clarify the impact, we searched Web of Science, EMBASE, Medline, and PsychINFO until 18/11/2023 and conducted a systematic review of controlled longitudinal cohort studies (Prospero: CRD42022308166). The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess quality. We identified 6 studies. Worsening of mental health symptoms was more evident in ADHD or control group according to symptom considered and context. However, those with ADHD had more persistent elevated symptoms and remained an at-risk population. Sleep problems deteriorated more significantly in those with ADHD. Lower pre-COVID emotion regulation skills and greater rumination were associated with worse mental health outcomes, and longer screen time with poorer sleep. Quality was rated as low in most studies, mainly due to self-report outcome measures and no information on attrition rates. Despite these limitations, results suggest a predominantly negative impact on youths with ADHD and may guide clinical practice and policy.

We aimed to identify diagnosis-specific/transdiagnostic/transoutcome multivariable candidate predictors (MCPs) of key outcomes in mental disorders. We conducted an umbrella review (protocol  link ), searching MEDLINE/Embase (19/07/2022), including systematic reviews of studies reporting on MCPs of response, remission, recovery, or relapse, in DSM/ICD-defined mental disorders. From published predictors, we filtered MCPs, validating MCP criteria. AMSTAR2/PROBAST measured quality/risk of bias of systematic reviews/individual studies. We included 117 systematic reviews, 403 studies, 299,888 individuals with mental disorders, testing 796 prediction models. Only 4.3%/1.2% of the systematic reviews/individual studies were at low risk of bias. The most frequently targeted outcome was remission (36.9%), the least frequent was recovery (2.5%). Studies mainly focused on depressive (39.4%), substance-use (17.9%), and schizophrenia-spectrum (11.9%) disorders. We identified numerous MCPs within disorders for response, remission and relapse, but none for recovery. Transdiagnostic MCPs of remission included lower disease-specific symptoms (disorders = 5), female sex/higher education (disorders = 3), and quality of life/functioning (disorders = 2). Transdiagnostic MCPs of relapse included higher disease-specific symptoms (disorders = 5), higher depressive symptoms (disorders = 3), and younger age/higher anxiety symptoms/global illness severity/ number of previous episodes/negative life events (disorders = 2). Finally, positive trans-outcome MCPs for depression included less negative life events/depressive symptoms (response, remission, less relapse), female sex (response, remission) and better functioning (response, less relapse); for schizophrenia, less positive symptoms/higher depressive symptoms (remission, less relapse); for substance use disorder, marital status/higher education (remission, less relapse). Male sex, younger age, more clinical symptoms and comorbid mental/physical symptoms/disorders were poor prognostic factors, while positive factors included social contacts and employment, absent negative life events, higher education, early access/intervention, lower disease-specific and comorbid mental and physical symptoms/conditions, across mental disorders. Current data limitations include high risk of bias of studies and extraction of single predictors from multivariable models. Identified MCPs can inform future development, validation or refinement of prediction models of key outcomes in mental disorders.

BACKGROUND:The co-occurrence between attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and physical conditions is frequent but often goes unrecognised. Most available evidence on the links between ADHD and physical conditions relies on cross-sectional studies. Understanding temporal sequences of associations is key to inform appropriate treatment and preventive strategies. We aimed to assess possible longitudinal associations between ADHD symptoms and a broad range of physical conditions, adjusting for several confounding factors. METHODS:Participants came from the population-based Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development. Participants were selected from the Quebec Birth Registry, recruited between October, 1997, and July, 1998, from the province of Quebec, Canada, and followed up in early childhood (n=2120; age 5 months-5 years), middle childhood (n=1750; age 6-12 years), and adolescence (n=1573; age 13-17 years). Main outcome measures included ADHD symptom severity and physical conditions, which were reported by the person most knowledgeable of the child in early childhood, by teachers in middle childhood, and self-reported in adolescence. Multivariable regression analyses were conducted to study the prospective associations between ADHD symptoms and later physical conditions, and physical conditions and later ADHD symptoms, adjusting for multiple confounders. FINDINGS/RESULTS:We found several prospective associations between ADHD symptoms and physical conditions including asthma, high BMI (≥1 SD above the mean), epilepsy, dental caries, acute infections, injuries, and sleep problems. After adjusting for key confounding factors, several associations remained: ADHD symptoms in early childhood were associated with later high BMI during middle childhood (odds ratio [OR] 1·19 [95% CI 1·05-1·35]) and adolescence (OR 1·14 [1·01-1·29]), and with unintentional injuries during adolescence (OR 1·10 [1·01-1·21]). ADHD symptoms in middle childhood were significantly associated with later dental caries during adolescence (OR 1·10 [1·01-1·20]). Unintentional injuries in early childhood were associated with later ADHD symptoms in middle childhood (standardised mean difference [SMD] 0·15 [0·05-0·24]) and adolescence (SMD 0·13 [0·04-0·23]), and restless legs syndrome symptoms in middle childhood were associated with later ADHD symptoms in adolescence (SMD 0·15 [0·05-0·25]). INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:Our results point to the need to carefully monitor children with ADHD in early or middle childhood for several physical conditions, and to monitor children with particular physical conditions for ADHD symptoms. Our study also calls for policies to promote more integrated health-care systems for children with complex mental and physical needs, bridging the current gap between mental and physical health-care services. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:Québec Government's Ministry of Health, Ministry of Education, and Ministry of Family Affairs; The Lucie and André Chagnon Foundation; the Robert-Sauvé Research Institute of Health and Safety at Work; the Québec Statistics Institute; the Fonds de Recherche du Québec-Santé; the Fonds de Recherche du Québec-Societé et Culture; Canada's Social Science and Humanities Research Council; the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Sainte-Justine Research Center; and the French National Research Agency. TRANSLATION/UNASSIGNED:For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

OBJECTIVE:To systematically assess credibility and certainty of associations between cannabis, cannabinoids, and cannabis based medicines and human health, from observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). DESIGN:Umbrella review. DATA SOURCES:PubMed, PsychInfo, Embase, up to 9 February 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES:Systematic reviews with meta-analyses of observational studies and RCTs that have reported on the efficacy and safety of cannabis, cannabinoids, or cannabis based medicines were included. Credibility was graded according to convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or not significant (observational evidence), and by GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) (RCTs). Quality was assessed with AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2). Sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS:101 meta-analyses were included (observational=50, RCTs=51) (AMSTAR 2 high 33, moderate 31, low 32, or critically low 5). From RCTs supported by high to moderate certainty, cannabis based medicines increased adverse events related to the central nervous system (equivalent odds ratio 2.84 (95% confidence interval 2.16 to 3.73)), psychological effects (3.07 (1.79 to 5.26)), and vision (3.00 (1.79 to 5.03)) in people with mixed conditions (GRADE=high), improved nausea/vomit, pain, spasticity, but increased psychiatric, gastrointestinal adverse events, and somnolence among others (GRADE=moderate). Cannabidiol improved 50% reduction of seizures (0.59 (0.38 to 0.92)) and seizure events (0.59 (0.36 to 0.96)) (GRADE=high), but increased pneumonia, gastrointestinal adverse events, and somnolence (GRADE=moderate). For chronic pain, cannabis based medicines or cannabinoids reduced pain by 30% (0.59 (0.37 to 0.93), GRADE=high), across different conditions (n=7), but increased psychological distress. For epilepsy, cannabidiol increased risk of diarrhoea (2.25 (1.33 to 3.81)), had no effect on sleep disruption (GRADE=high), reduced seizures across different populations and measures (n=7), improved global impression (n=2), quality of life, and increased risk of somnolence (GRADE=moderate). In the general population, cannabis worsened positive psychotic symptoms (5.21 (3.36 to 8.01)) and total psychiatric symptoms (7.49 (5.31 to 10.42)) (GRADE=high), negative psychotic symptoms, and cognition (n=11) (GRADE=moderate). In healthy people, cannabinoids improved pain threshold (0.74 (0.59 to 0.91)), unpleasantness (0.60 (0.41 to 0.88)) (GRADE=high). For inflammatory bowel disease, cannabinoids improved quality of life (0.34 (0.22 to 0.53) (GRADE=high). For multiple sclerosis, cannabinoids improved spasticity, pain, but increased risk of dizziness, dry mouth, nausea, somnolence (GRADE=moderate). For cancer, cannabinoids improved sleep disruption, but had gastrointestinal adverse events (n=2) (GRADE=moderate). Cannabis based medicines, cannabis, and cannabinoids resulted in poor tolerability across various conditions (GRADE=moderate). Evidence was convincing from observational studies (main and sensitivity analyses) in pregnant women, small for gestational age (1.61 (1.41 to 1.83)), low birth weight (1.43 (1.27 to 1.62)); in drivers, car crash (1.27 (1.21 to 1.34)); and in the general population, psychosis (1.71 (1.47 to 2.00)). Harmful effects were noted for additional neonatal outcomes, outcomes related to car crash, outcomes in the general population including psychotic symptoms, suicide attempt, depression, and mania, and impaired cognition in healthy cannabis users (all suggestive to highly suggestive). CONCLUSIONS:Convincing or converging evidence supports avoidance of cannabis during adolescence and early adulthood, in people prone to or with mental health disorders, in pregnancy and before and while driving. Cannabidiol is effective in people with epilepsy. Cannabis based medicines are effective in people with multiple sclerosis, chronic pain, inflammatory bowel disease, and in palliative medicine but not without adverse events. STUDY REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42018093045. FUNDING:None.

INTRODUCTION:Suicide is an important public health problem. Providing evidence-based psychosocial interventions to individuals presenting with self-harm is recognised as an important suicide prevention strategy. Therefore, it is crucial to understand which intervention is most effective in preventing self-harm repetition. We will evaluate the comparative efficacy of psychosocial interventions for the prevention of self-harm in adults. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) testing psychosocial interventions for the prevention of self-harm repetition. We will include RCTs in adults (mean age: 18 years or more) who presented with self-harm in the 6 months preceding enrolment in the trial. Interventions will be categorised according to their similarities and underpinning theoretical approaches (eg, cognitive behavioural therapy, case management). A health sciences librarian will update and adapt the search strategy from the most recent Cochrane pairwise systematic review on this topic. The searches will be performed in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycInfo (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Cochrane Central (Wiley), Cochrane Protocols (Wiley), LILACS and PSYNDEX from 1 July 2020 (Cochrane review last search date) to 1 September 2023. The primary efficacy outcome will be self-harm repetition. Secondary outcomes will include suicide mortality, suicidal ideation and depressive symptoms. Retention in treatment (ie, drop-outs rates) will be analysed as the main acceptability outcome. Two reviewers will independently assess the study eligibility and risk of bias (using RoB-2). An NMA will be performed to synthesise all direct and indirect comparisons. Ranked forest plots and Vitruvian plots will be used to represent graphically the results of the NMA. Credibility of network estimates will be evaluated using Confidence in NMA (CINeMA). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:As this is the protocol for an aggregate-data level NMA, ethical approval will not be required. Results will be disseminated at national/international conferences and in peer-review journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42021273057.

BACKGROUND:Despite the significant psychiatric effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, there's limited data on the prevalence and risk factors of depression and suicide attempts among South Korean adults. METHODS:A nationwide cross-sectional study using the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) data from 1998 to 2021 was conducted. Changes in prevalence and risk factors for depression and suicide attempts were assessed using weighted odds ratios or weighted beta coefficients. RESULTS:During the observation period (1998-2021), the prevalence of depression increased in the overall population; however, no significant surge was found regarding the COVID-19 pandemic, from 2.78% (95% CI, 2.41-3.15) in 1998-2005-4.96% (4.32-5.61) in 2020 and 5.06% (4.43-5.69) in 2021. However, immediately after the onset of the pandemic, younger ages, male sex, urban residence, higher education, and high economic status became significant vulnerable factors compared to pre-pandemic periods. The prevalence of suicide attempts remained stable, and there was no notable surge specifically related to the COVID-19 pandemic, from 0.23% (95% CI, 0.18-0.28) in 1998-2005-0.45% (0.25-0.66) in 2020 and 0.42% (0.24-0.60) in 2021. Furthermore, no distinct vulnerable factors associated with suicide attempts have been identified. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Through this nationwide serial cross-sectional survey study, we emphasized the need for understanding the differential impacts of global crises, such as COVID-19, across varied population subgroups, thereby highlighting the importance of specific and targeted mental health support strategies.

Adverse Events (AEs) are defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign or symptom, that may occur during or after receipt of any intervention. The principle of non-maleficence requires careful consideration to ensure that existing or new psychological interventions are not harmful before they can be considered beneficial. In this context, the safety of psychological interventions, including the possible occurrence of AEs, is increasingly important for patients, families, and clinicians. The evaluation of AEs is crucial to obtain a complete understanding of the risk/benefit balance of psychological interventions. There is a need for researchers and clinicians to assess and report AEs comprehensively and in a coordinated manner. It is necessary to have more accurate data on the recording of AEs in protocols to enhance transparency and consistency, as well as to improve practice. Finally, and to facilitate this process, there is a need for standards for data collection.

The offspring of parents with mental disorders are at increased risk for developing mental disorders themselves. The risk to offspring may extend transdiagnostically to disorders other than those present in the parents. The literature on this topic is vast but mixed. To inform targeted prevention and genetic counseling, we performed a comprehensive, PRISMA 2020-compliant meta-analysis. We systematically searched the literature published up to September 2022 to retrieve original family high-risk and registry studies reporting on the risk of mental disorders in offspring of parents with any type of mental disorder. We performed random-effects meta-analyses of the relative risk (risk ratio, RR) and absolute risk (lifetime, up to the age at assessment) of mental disorders, defined according to the ICD or DSM. Cumulative incidence by offspring age was determined using meta-analytic Kaplan-Meier curves. We measured heterogeneity with the I² statistic, and risk of bias with the Quality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. Sensitivity analyses addressed the impact of study design (family high-risk vs. registry) and specific vs. transdiagnostic risks. Transdiagnosticity was appraised with the TRANSD criteria. We identified 211 independent studies that reported data on 3,172,115 offspring of parents with psychotic, bipolar, depressive, disruptive, attention-deficit/hyperactivity, anxiety, substance use, eating, obsessive-compulsive, and borderline personality disorders, and 20,428,575 control offspring. The RR and lifetime risk of developing any mental disorder were 3.0 and 55% in offspring of parents with anxiety disorders; 2.6 and 17% in offspring of those with psychosis; 2.1 and 55% in offspring of those with bipolar disorder; 1.9 and 51% in offspring of those with depressive disorders; and 1.5 and 38% in offspring of those with substance use disorders. The offspring's RR and lifetime risk of developing the same mental disorder diagnosed in their parent were 8.4 and 32% for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; 5.8 and 8% for psychosis; 5.1 and 5% for bipolar disorder; 2.8 and 9% for substance use disorders; 2.3 and 14% for depressive disorders; 2.3 and 1% for eating disorders; and 2.2 and 31% for anxiety disorders. There were 37 significant transdiagnostic associations between parental mental disorders and the RR of developing a different mental disorder in the offspring. In offspring of parents with psychosis, bipolar and depressive disorder, the risk of the same disorder onset emerged at 16, 5 and 6 years, and cumulated to 3%, 19% and 24% by age 18; and to 8%, 36% and 46% by age 28. Heterogeneity ranged from 0 to 0.98, and 96% of studies were at high risk of bias. Sensitivity analyses restricted to prospective family high-risk studies confirmed the pattern of findings with similar RR, but with greater absolute risks compared to analyses of all study types. This study demonstrates at a global, meta-analytic level that offspring of affected parents have strongly elevated RR and lifetime risk of developing any mental disorder as well as the same mental disorder diagnosed in the parent. The transdiagnostic risks suggest that offspring of parents with a range of mental disorders should be considered as candidates for targeted primary prevention.

BACKGROUND:Sleep difficulties are common in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, sleep problems are multifaceted and little is known about the variation in sleep difficulties across children with ADHD. We examined the profiles of sleep difficulties in children with ADHD and associated clinical factors (e.g. co-occurring mental health conditions, stimulant use and parent mental health). METHODS:Data from two harmonised studies of children with ADHD (total: N = 392, ages 5-13 years) were used. Parents completed measures of children's sleep, co-occurring mental health conditions and their own mental health. Both parents and teachers completed measures of child ADHD symptoms and emotional and conduct symptoms. Latent profile analysis was used to identify sleep profiles, and multinomial logistic regression assessed clinical correlates of the groups. RESULTS:Five sleep profiles were identified: (a) insomnia/delayed sleep phase (36%), (b) generalised sleep difficulties at sleep onset and overnight (25%), (c) high anxious/bedtime resistance difficulties (11%), (d) overnight sleep difficulties including obstructive sleep apnoea and parasomnias (5%) and (e) no sleep difficulties (22%). Compared with the group without sleep difficulties, the generalised, anxious/bedtime resistance and insomnia/delayed sleep phase sleep had greater parent-reported emotional and conduct symptoms, co-occurring anxiety and increased parent mental health difficulties. The generalised and anxious/bedtime resistance groups also had greater parent-reported ADHD symptoms, with the anxious/bedtime resistance sleep group also having more frequent co-occurring depression and teacher-reported emotional symptoms. CONCLUSIONS:The sleep difficulties experienced by children with ADHD are varied. Supports to help children with ADHD need to consider the particular profiles of sleep difficulties experienced and broader clinical characteristics. Tailored intervention approaches are likely needed (including a need to address parent mental health).