Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Sex differences in adolescent mental disorders are well documented, but less is known about how these differences evolve during the transition to adulthood, particularly during the shift from Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) to Adult Mental Health Services (AMHS), a critical period marked by vulnerability to discontinuity of care. OBJECTIVE:To examine sex-specific differences in psychiatric symptom profiles and clinical trajectories during the CAMHS-AMHS transition using data from the European MILESTONE project, a 2-year longitudinal study. METHODS:A cohort of 1004 adolescents (aged 17-19) in CAMHS was assessed at baseline (T1), 9 months (T2), 15 months (T3) and 24 months (T4). Measures included the Child Behavior Checklist/Adult Behavior Checklist, Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for Children and Adolescents, and the Specific Level of Functioning Scale. Multilevel modelling included sex, diagnosis and time point as covariates, testing three-way interactions for differential trajectories. FINDINGS/RESULTS:Males showed higher symptom severity and impairment across measures, particularly in anxiety/somatic/trauma, eating disorder/obsessive-compulsive disorder (ED/OCD) and schizophrenia. Females exhibited better functioning. Significant sex differences emerged in internalising symptoms (eg, anxiety/somatic/trauma, autism spectrum disorder (ASD)), externalising symptoms (eg, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)), overall psychopathology (eg, ADHD, personality disorder/conduct disorder/substance use disorder) and functioning (eg, ED/OCD, schizophrenia spectrum disorder). CONCLUSIONS:Sex-related differences in symptom severity, diagnosis and functioning persist across the CAMHS-AMHS transition, with males generally more impaired and females showing better adaptive outcomes. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Identifying sex-specific trajectories can enhance personalised transitional care, reduce misdiagnosis and guide targeted interventions-especially for under-recognised presentations such as ADHD/ASD in females and ED in males. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER/BACKGROUND:ISRCTN83240263.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE:Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is common in children. Many children with ADHD have chronic insomnia, which is associated with negative outcomes for the child and family and can worsen ADHD symptoms. Behavioural sleep interventions can be effective for children with ADHD and are the recommended first-line approach to management. However, many parents/carers may not have access to, or struggle to implement, interventions in practice. This study explored parents/carers views and experiences of: 1) behavioural sleep management strategies, 2) help-seeking for managing sleep problems and 3) perceptions about a potential digital sleep guide for managing sleep problems. PATIENTS/METHODS/METHODS:A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews of parents/carers of children with ADHD/ADHD traits and chronic insomnia symptoms (CIS). Participants were recruited via social media and purposively sampled for diverse characteristics. Interviews were conducted by telephone/videocall, recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS:Eighteen parents/carers took part; two themes and six subthemes were developed. Despite valuing behavioural sleep strategies, parents/carers noted many challenges to engaging with them, including perceiving these strategies to be both ineffective for children with ADHD and not easy to implement in the real world. They described that tiredness, exhaustion, ADHD symptoms and challenging behaviour make parent engagement with strategies difficult. Parents/carers welcomed digital support in principle, particularly because they perceived health professional support to be lacking. However, they noted that digital interventions must address their key support needs regarding flexibility, realistic expectations and a pragmatic approach, as well as comradeship, support and testimonials from other parents/carers. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Tailored but flexible support and reassurance are necessary for parents/carers of children with ADHD and CIS. Digital support must validate parent/carer experiences and include experiences from other parents/carers.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is one of the common mental disorders globally. However, there are limited studies on the prevalence of OCD and four other disorders categorized under obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, namely, hoarding disorder, excoriation disorder, body dysmorphic disorder, and trichotillomania. The authors sought to fill the epidemiological gap in the literature. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:criteria, were included. A Bayesian hierarchical linear mixed model was used to estimate the lifetime prevalence of OCD at the global, regional, and national levels, with estimates reported with 95% credible intervals. The authors examined the association between OCD prevalence and the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), and estimated age-specific point prevalence of OCD. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:criteria. Lifetime prevalence of OCD was negatively correlated with SDI, indicating lower prevalence estimates in countries with higher SDI. The age-specific prevalence of OCD increased sharply in the teen years and peaked in the late 20s to early 30s. Point prevalence ranged across studies from 0.98% to 5.81% for hoarding disorder, from 2.33% to 7.68% for excoriation disorder, from 0.44% to 15.21% for body dysmorphic disorder, and from 0.0% to 2.12% for trichotillomania. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:This study estimated the global prevalence of OCD according to diagnostic criteria, underscoring the role of diagnostic definitions in shaping epidemiological understanding.

While attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications, particularly stimulants, are among the most effective treatments in psychiatry, there remains a need for novel alternatives, as not all individuals with ADHD respond to or tolerate currently available medications. We aimed to provide an up-to-date overview of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of agents either not approved for ADHD or approved for ADHD but tested for off-label indications. We updated, using the same methodology, two previous reviews (Cortese et al, 2023 exploring agents in the pipeline for children with ADHD, and Veronesi et al, 2024, focusing on RCTs of novel compounds in adults with ADHD). For the update, we searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the European Union-based EU Clinical Trials registers up to December 14, 2025. Including the RCTs retrieved by the two previous reviews and those from the updated search, we identified a total of 53 eligible RCTs. Of these, 11 reported results in children and adolescents, and 11 in adults. Considering agents with at least two positive trials for ADHD core symptoms without negative trials, only dasotraline, in children, and centanafadine, in adults, emerged as promising (however, the dasotraline development programme was halted in 2020). This review also includes a discussion of opportunities for advancing the development of novel, effective agents and maximising the benefits of currently available options.

BACKGROUND:Poor persistence and adherence to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medication is a significant barrier to effective long-term care, particularly during adolescence, yet age-specific and sex-specific trajectories remain poorly characterised. OBJECTIVE:To characterise medication initiation, discontinuation and long-term adherence patterns for children and adolescents diagnosed with ADHD in a real-world setting. METHODS:A nationwide retrospective cohort study, including 8961 children and adolescents (aged <18 years) with a new ADHD diagnosis in child and adolescent mental health services between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2012, with follow-up until 31 December 2021. Main outcomes were medication initiation rates; time to first medication discontinuation, analysed using Kaplan-Meier estimates and restricted mean survival time at 1 year and longitudinal adherence, measured by the proportion of days covered over 9 years. FINDINGS/RESULTS:Of the 8961 individuals in the cohort (mean age at diagnosis, 12 years; 69% male), 6661 (74.3%) initiated medication, with a median time from diagnosis to initiation of 106 days (IQR 17-231); 55% initiated within 90 days. Discontinuation increased significantly with age; adolescents aged 15-17 years remained on treatment for 31.9 fewer days (95% CI -40.8 to -23.1; p<0.001) in the first year compared with children aged 5-11 years. Females also discontinued significantly earlier than males (difference -13.2 days; 95% CI -19.8 to -6.5; p<0.001). Longitudinal analysis confirmed that older age at initiation and female sex were associated with a significantly steeper decline in medication coverage over time. CONCLUSIONS:Discontinuation and low adherence to ADHD medication were common and increased substantially through adolescence, with females at higher risk of early cessation. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Late adolescence warrants closer clinical monitoring and shared decision-making to support appropriate treatment continuation or well-informed discontinuation, particularly for older adolescents and females. Integrating structured transition planning and attention to sex-specific barriers may help reduce avoidable non-adherence during this high-risk period.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:A variety of rating scales are currently being used to assess symptom severity and quantify symptoms change in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) research and clinical practice. This poses difficulties in interpreting scores from different scales in clinical practice and synthesizing data from studies using different scales. We aimed to develop algorithms for converting scores across the ADHD scales most often used in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ADHD medications in children/adolescents and adults, and to develop an online tool for implementing the algorithms. METHODS: RESULTS:We linked six commonly used ADHD scales, such as the ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS-IV; investigator-rated) and the Conners' Parent Rating Scale (CPRS-R:S). Spline models most frequently yielded the lowest prediction error, outperforming alternative conversion algorithms for absolute scores in 6 out of 12 univariable models and 8 out of 12 multivariable models. The tool for scores conversion is available at ADHD_Scale_Conversion_Tool. CONCLUSIONS:Our linkage algorithms enable the comparison and harmonization of findings across studies using different ADHD rating scales. Translating scores across scales improves the interpretability of research findings, facilitates future evidence synthesis across studies, and may support clinical practice. Our online tool supports the practical uptake of our results.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurodevelopmental condition in  children and young people worldwide. Robust estimates of its incidence, prevalence, and burden are essential for informing public health policy and planning. Using data from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021 (GBD 2021), this global population-based analysis assessed ADHD among individuals under 20 years of age across 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2021. The study examined incidence, prevalence, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) associated with ADHD. In 2021, there were an estimated 46,890,733 (95% uncertainty interval [UI]: 32,136,904-67,271,064) prevalent cases and 4,111,621 (2,775,203-5,954,941) incident cases globally in individuals under 20 years. ADHD accounted for 574,979 (294,277-977,557) DALYs, with a global prevalence rate of 1.78% (1.22-2.55%) and an incidence rate of 0.16% (0.11-0.23%). The global DALY rate was 21.8 (11.2-37.1) per 100,000 population. Prevalence and incidence were highest in Australia, with rates of 5.62% (4.16-7.46%) and 0.49% (0.34-0.66%), respectively. Between 1990 and 2021, global prevalence and incidence rates decreased modestly by 6.0 and 5.81%, respectively. Across all GBD regions, prevalence was higher in males than females (2.52 vs 0.99%) and increased with higher socio-demographic index levels. Overall, the GBD 2021 study provides the most comprehensive global estimates of ADHD burden in young people. These findings are important for guiding policymakers and stakeholders, although potential methodological limitations suggest that the prevalence, incidence, and burden of ADHD may be underestimated.

IntroductionBipolar depression is disabling and often inadequately responsive to medication alone. The current efficacy evidence of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for bipolar depression is conflicting. Therefore, we synthesized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that tested the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of TMS for bipolar depression.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE/EMBASE/Cochrane/PsycINFO/gray literature (01/10/2025) for RCTs comparing any TMS protocol with sham. Co-primary outcomes were depressive symptoms, all-cause discontinuation; secondary outcomes were response, remission. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed with RoB-2. Random-effects models estimated standardized mean differences (SMDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI), alongside sensitivity, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses.ResultsNineteen comparisons from 17 RCTs (N = 563; TMS = 293, sham = 270; mean N TMS = 15.4, sham = 15.9; mean duration = 2.40 weeks; RoB "low" = 35%, "some concerns" = 65%) were included. Among trials reporting subtypes (k = 13), 41.8% of participants had bipolar I disorder, and 58.2% had bipolar II disorder. The left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex was the most common target (k = 12). TMS reduced depressive symptoms versus sham (SMD = -0.34; 95%CI = -0.58 to -0.11), with no difference in all-cause discontinuation. TMS was favoured for response (RR = 1.41; 95%CI = 1.10 to 1.80) and remission (RR = 1.54; 95%CI = 1.06 to 2.23). However, these effects were not consistently confirmed in sensitivity or subgroup analyses by RoB, TMS type, stimulation site, or treatment resistance. Overall, 15 comparisons (88.2%) did not show superiority of TMS over sham for depressive symptoms at the individual trial level. No seizures or serious adverse events occurred; adverse events did not differ from sham. Meta-regression suggested a greater number of total pulses was associated with greater depressive symptom reduction (β = -0.018; p = .00017).ConclusionsTMS shows a small meta-analytic antidepressant effect and acceptable tolerability in bipolar depression despite most individual trials being negative. However, subgroups and sensitivity findings did not support TMS as an efficacious treatment at current doses. Further testing via larger RCTs with higher-dose protocols is warranted.

Anxiety disorders are the most prevalent mental health conditions worldwide. While their burden in terms of excess mortality is known to be high, a quantitative systematic evaluation of all-cause and cause-specific mortality and suicide attempt risks in people with anxiety or stress-related disorders is lacking. We performed a systematic review and random effects meta-analysis, in which co-primary outcomes were risk ratios (RRs) for all-cause and suicide-related mortality, and secondary outcomes were natural-cause mortality, other cause-specific mortality, and risk of suicide attempt. Sensitivity and meta-regression analyses were conducted. Overall, 165 studies encompassing 7,395,722 people with any anxiety or stress-related disorder and 135,059,023 controls, from 27 different countries across all continents, were included. Compared with the general population, a higher risk of all-cause mortality was associated with any anxiety or stress-related disorder (n=42, RR=1.54, 95% CI: 1.14-2.08, p=0.005), generalized anxiety disorder (n=9, RR=1.48, 95% CI: 1.23-1.78, p<0.001), and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other stress-related disorders (n=21, RR=1.39, 95% CI: 1.15-1.67, p<0.001), but not with panic disorder, phobias, and mixed anxiety or stress-related disorders. Suicide mortality was increased in people with any anxiety or stress-related disorder (n=39, RR=2.88, 95% CI: 2.13-3.89, p<0.001), panic disorder (n=3, RR=3.58, 95% CI: 1.39-9.25, p<0.008), mixed anxiety or stress-related disorders (n=27, RR=2.77, 95% CI: 1.89-4.07, p<0.001), PTSD and other stress-related disorders (n=11, RR=3.13, 95% CI: 1.85-5.28, p<0.001), and generalized anxiety disorder (n=3, RR=1.93, 95% CI: 1.17-3.17, p<0.01). Suicide attempt risk was higher than in the general population in people with all anxiety or stress-related disorders, ranging from RR=6.33 (95% CI: 4.08-9.82, n=5) in panic disorder to RR=2.74 (95% CI: 1.72-4.35, n=5) in phobias. Natural-cause mortality was increased in any anxiety or stress-related disorder (n=19, RR=1.25, 95% CI: 1.09-1.44, p=0.002), generalized anxiety disorder (n=5, RR=1.55, 95% CI: 1.19-2.02, p=0.001), mixed anxiety or stress-related disorders (n=8, RR=1.26, 95% CI: 1.02-1.56, p=0.033), and PTSD and other stress-related disorders (n=9, RR=1.17, 95% CI: 1.03-1.33, p=0.019), but not in panic disorder. Cardiovascular-related deaths were increased in any and mixed anxiety or stress-related disorders and in generalized anxiety disorder, while cancer mortality was increased only in generalized anxiety disorder. When analyzing people with vs. without anxiety disorders with samples being matched by comorbid physical or mental disorders, results remained significant for all-cause mortality in generalized anxiety disorder and panic disorder, but not in any or mixed anxiety or stress-related disorders, and in PTSD and stress-related disorders. When compared with other mental disorders, no difference in co-primary outcomes emerged from more than two studies. Publication bias was present across several analyses, but sensitivity analyses largely confirmed the main findings. In meta-regression analyses, more recent data collection mitigated all-cause mortality, while schizophrenia-spectrum and bipolar disorder comorbidity mitigated suicide mortality risk, possibly driven by underlying treatment. This meta-analysis documents a higher all-cause, suicide and natural-cause mortality, and a higher risk of suicide attempt, in people with anxiety or stress-related disorders compared to the general population. Given the high prevalence and the recognized global treatment gap for these disorders, this finding is of great public health concern, and calls for appropriate prevention, screening and treatment strategies. More studies are needed to fill the publication bias gap and to identify modifiable risk or mitigating factors.

The clinical management of a complex disorder such as schizophrenia remains a significant challenge worldwide. This disorder requires a comprehensive, integrated and personalized care that blends multiple approaches, and the real-world availability of multiple resources. We present here the first recommendations addressing the real-world comprehensive care for people with schizophrenia-spectrum psychoses across different approaches, clinical stages, and levels of available resources. The recommendations are based on a critical review of the scientific literature and a collaborative appraisal by numerous clinical academics actively treating people with schizophrenia worldwide, representing various countries and clinical settings, including those in the Global South. Experts by experience were also involved. Our recommendations indicate that the comprehensive care of schizophrenia should involve: a) early detection; b) measurement-based monitoring; c) pharmacological treatments; d) psychological interventions; e) psychosocial interventions (including supported employment, housing and education); f) management of somatic conditions; g) community care; h) inpatient care; i) peer support, self-help, and alternative healing methods; j) population-level prevention, and l) societal-level support. The overarching core recommendation is to implement evidence-based care that addresses disparities across high- to middle/low-resource settings, emphasizing early intervention (and prevention when possible), culturally-sensitive paradigms that leverage the local existing resources, and task-sharing models that involve non-professional health care workers and, if possible, traditional healers. In the future, we expect that scalable and resource-saving, evidence-based digital solutions will help extend and improve care quality and efficiency across all resource settings. However, none of this can be achieved without adequately focusing on and strengthening mental health funding, improving access to care, addressing social determinants of health, and recognizing that care for people at risk for or living with schizophrenia is uneven and in need of improvement across all settings.