Dataset Information

How have predictors, moderators, mediators, treatment response, remission and resistance been defined and measured in randomised controlled trials for adolescent depression? A scoping review protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Among randomised controlled trials for depressed adolescents, the extent of variation in how depressive symptom outcomes are defined is unknown. The variability in which potential predictors of these outcomes are tested is also unclear. This paper is a protocol describing the methods of a planned scoping review. The scoping review will examine and summarise how change in depressive symptoms have been described in RCT treatment studies to date. This review will report the measures used to describe change in depressive symptoms and whether the measure was used as a continuous or binary outcome or both. This review will describe how dichotomous outcome terms are defined to describe change in depression severity. This review will also examine predictors, moderators and mediators of change in depressive symptoms within RCTs.

Methods and analysis

In this paper, we describe the protocol for our scoping review. Following the format outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews, a research librarian will develop an operationalised search strategy, which we will apply to the MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases. We will search for papers from inception to 6 February 2020. A hand search for key citations will also be conducted. Investigator-raters will screen articles, first via the titles and abstracts and then through full-text reviews. We will include articles with randomised control design which assess the treatment of adolescents with major depressive disorder. We will systematically extract and synthesise prespecified data which includes: definition of depression used for participant inclusion, measures used to evaluate changes in depression, type of outcome used (continuous, binary or both), definitions of dichotomous terms to denote change in depression (eg, response, remission, recovery, etc) and reported predictors/moderators/mediators of change.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethics approval is not required. Findings will be presented in journal publications and at conferences.

SUBMITTER: Courtney D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7311009 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe application of precision medicine principles for the treatment of depressive disorders in adolescents requires an examination of the variables associated with depression outcomes in randomized clinical trials (RCTs).ObjectiveTo describe predictors, moderators, and mediators associated with outcomes in RCTs for the treatment of depressive disorders in adolescents.Evidence reviewA scoping review of RCTs for the treatment of depression in adolescents was conducted. Databases searched included MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo, and CINAHL. Included publications tested predictors, moderators, and/or mediators associated with depression symptom outcomes (eg, symptom reduction, response, remission) in RCTs pertaining to the treatment of adolescents, ages 13 to 17 years. Predictors were defined as variables that were associated with depression outcomes, independent of treatment group. Moderators were defined as baseline variables that were associated with differential outcomes between treatment groups. Mediators were defined by a formal mediation analysis. In duplicate, variables were extracted and coded with respect to analysis type (univariable or multivariable), statistical significance, direction of effect size, reporting of a priori hypotheses, and adjustment for multiple comparisons. Aggregated results were summarized by variable domain and RCT sample.FindingsEighty-one articles reporting on variables associated with outcomes across 33 RCTs were identified, including studies of biological (10 RCTs), psychosocial (18 RCTs), and combined (4 RCTs) treatments as well as a service delivery model (1 RCT). Fifty-three variable domains were tested as baseline predictors of depression outcome, 41 as moderators, 19 as postbaseline predictors, and 5 as mediators. Variable domains that were reported as significant in at least 3 RCTs included age, sex/gender, baseline depression severity, early response to treatment, sleep changes, parent-child conflict, overall psychopathology, suicidal ideation, hopelessness, functional impairment, attendance at therapy sessions, and history of trauma. Two publications reported a priori hypotheses and adjustment for multiple comparisons, both finding that baseline depression severity and family conflict were associated with poorer outcomes.Conclusions and relevanceThis review identified commonly researched variables requiring more scrutiny as well as underresearched variables to inform future study designs. Further efforts to discover predictors, moderators, and mediators associated with treatment response have great potential to optimize care for adolescents with depression.

Project description:Safe, efficacious, second-line pharmacological treatment options exist for the large portion of older adults with major depressive disorder who do not respond to first-line pharmacotherapy. However, limited evidence exists to aid clinical decision making regarding which patients will benefit from which second-line treatments.To test the moderating role of pretreatment executive function, severity of anxiety, and severity of medical comorbidity in remission of treatment-resistant late-life depression after aripiprazole augmentation.As follow-up to a 12-week randomized clinical trial of aripiprazole augmentation for first-line treatment-resistant late-life depression (Incomplete Response in Late-Life Depression: Getting to Remission [IRL-GRey]), we evaluated the effects of the following potential moderators and their interactions with treatment: baseline assessments of executive function (set shifting measured by the Trail Making Test) and response inhibition control (measured by a Color-Word Interference task), anxiety symptoms, and medical comorbidity. Analyses were conducted in May and June 2015.Aripiprazole or placebo tablets were started at 2 mg daily and titrated as tolerated, to a maximal dose of 15 mg daily.Remission of treatment-resistant late-life depression (defined as a Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score of ?10 at both of the last 2 consecutive visits).Of 181 trial participants (103 female [56.9%]) who were 60 years of age or older and whose major depression had failed to remit with venlafaxine hydrochloride monotherapy, 91 received aripiprazole and 90 received placebo. Remission occurred in 40 (43%) who received aripiprazole and 26 (29%) who received placebo. Baseline set shifting moderated the efficacy of aripiprazole augmentation (odds ratio [OR], 1.66 [95% CI, 1.05-2.62]; P?=?.03 for interaction with treatment). Among participants with a Trail Making Test scaled score of 7 or higher, the odds of remission were significantly higher with aripiprazole than with placebo (53% vs 28%; number needed to treat, 4; OR, 4.11 [95% CI, 1.83-9.20]). Among participants with a Trail Making Test scaled score of less than 7, aripiprazole and placebo were equally efficacious (OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.15-2.80]). Greater severity of anxiety at baseline predicted a lower remission rate but did not moderate aripiprazole efficacy; each standard deviation greater anxiety severity was associated with 50% reduced odds of remission in both aripiprazole and placebo arms. Medical comorbidity and Color-Word Interference test performance were neither general predictors nor treatment-moderating factors.Set-shifting performance indicates which older adults with treatment-resistant depression may respond favorably to augmentation with aripiprazole and thus may help to personalize treatment.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00892047.

Project description:This secondary analysis of the Child/Adolescent Anxiety Multimodal Study (CAMS) used baseline patient characteristics to identify prognostic subgroups of children based on likelihood of remission. We also investigated predictors and moderators of outcome. CAMS randomized 488 youths with generalized, social, and separation anxiety disorders to cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), sertraline, both, or pill placebo. Outcomes were Week 12 child, parent, and independent evaluator (IE) ratings of child anxiety. We used receiver operating characteristics analysis and stepwise regression to identify predictors and moderators of outcome. Severe anxiety, lower socioeconomic status, and comorbid obsessive-compulsive disorder predicted higher IE-rated anxiety posttreatment; child-rated social anxiety predicted poorer outcomes reported by all informants. Regarding moderators, Hispanic ethnicity predicted higher IE-rated anxiety after CBT and higher parent-rated anxiety after sertraline. In youths with severe anxiety (Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale ≥ 20, <italic>n</italic> = 220), combination treatment increased remission (relative risk [RR] = 2.85, <italic>p</italic> < .001), 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.51, 5.39], whereas CBT (RR = 1.55, <italic>p</italic> = .20), 95% CI [0.77, 3.10], and sertraline (RR = 1.27, <italic>p</italic> = .53), 95% CI [0.59, 2.73], did not significantly increase remission relative to placebo. These are the first findings demonstrating that a combination of CBT and a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, not monotherapy, is likely key for achieving remission in severe anxiety. CAMS was not powered to detect treatment efficacy after stratification by anxiety severity, so further research is needed regarding effective treatments in severe anxiety. Our main effect findings suggest youth with severe anxiety (especially social phobia), low socioeconomic status and obsessive-compulsive disorder benefit less from current first-line treatments relative to other anxious youth. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00052078.

Project description:IntroductionWhile primary care is often the first point of contact for adolescents with depression, more than half of depressed adolescents are either untreated or undertreated. A scoping review had been completed to summarize approaches for achieving quality integrated care in primary care focused on adolescent depression.MethodsThe scoping review followed the methodological framework for scoping studies from Arksey and O'Malley. Articles were grouped into themes and mapped to 6 quality domains for integrated care from the practice integration profile survey and 3 levels of stakeholders based on WHO's definition for health systems (patient/family, primary care team, and national/sub-national health system).ResultsA total of 868 records were screened resulting in 22 articles at the patient/family-level (5/22), the primary care team-level (18/22), and the national/sub-national health system-level (16/22). The results highlighted multilevel approaches to support the delivery of quality integrated care for adolescent depression in primary care: (1) population-focused using patient registries, routine screening based on standardized algorithms, and patient-centered strategies, (2) team-driven where primary care clinicians collaborate with mental health clinicians as part of a primary care team, (3) evidence-based delivery of mental health services across the integrated care pathway from screening to follow-up visits, and (4) measurement-guided by leveraging the electronic health record infrastructure to learn from patient outcomes.ConclusionMore research is needed on how to provide quality integrated care for adolescent depression, specifically on patient engagement and retention, grounded in the frontline experiences of patients, families, and clinicians and supported by national and/or sub-national guidelines. A learning system could help integrate mental health services in primary care in a way that is consistent across the national and/or sub-national health system.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Evidence-based health care is informed by results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and their syntheses in meta-analyses. When the trial outcomes measured are not clearly described in trial publications, knowledge synthesis, translation, and decision-making may be impeded. While heterogeneity in outcomes measured in adolescent major depressive disorder (MDD) RCTs has been described, the comprehensiveness of outcome reporting is unknown. This study aimed to assess the reporting of primary outcomes in RCTs evaluating treatments for adolescent MDD. METHODS:RCTs evaluating treatment interventions in adolescents with a diagnosis of MDD published between 2008 and 2017 specifying a single primary outcome were eligible for outcome reporting assessment. Outcome reporting assessment was done independently in duplicate using a comprehensive checklist of 58 reporting items. Primary outcome information provided in each RCT publication was scored as "fully reported", "partially reported", or "not reported" for each checklist item, as applicable. RESULTS:Eighteen of 42 identified articles were found to have a discernable single primary outcome and were included for outcome reporting assessment. Most trials (72%) did not fully report on over half of the 58 checklist items. Items describing masking of outcome assessors, timing and frequency of outcome assessment, and outcome analyses were fully reported in over 70% of trials. Items less frequently reported included outcome measurement instrument properties (ranging from 6 to 17%), justification of timing and frequency of outcome assessment (6%), and justification of criteria used for clinically significant differences (17%). The overall comprehensiveness of reporting appeared stable over time. CONCLUSIONS:Heterogeneous reporting exists in published adolescent MDD RCTs, with frequent omissions of key details about their primary outcomes. These omissions may impair interpretability, replicability, and synthesis of RCTs that inform clinical guidelines and decision-making in this field. Consensus on the minimal criteria for outcome reporting in adolescent MDD RCTs is needed.