Talk:Antidepressants and suicide risk

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Sources

Here are some sources which could be used to improve this article:

  • Hetrick, S. E.; McKenzie, J. E.; Cox, G. R.; Simmons, M. B.; Merry, S. N. (2012). Hetrick, Sarah E (ed.). "Newer generation antidepressants for depressive disorders in children and adolescents". The Cochrane Library. 11: CD004851. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004851.pub3. PMID 23152227.
  • Cox, G. R.; Callahan, P.; Churchill, R.; Hunot, V.; Merry, S. N.; Parker, A. G.; Hetrick, S. E. (2012). Cox, Georgina R (ed.). "Psychological therapies versus antidepressant medication, alone and in combination for depression in children and adolescents". The Cochrane Library. 11: CD008324. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD008324.pub2. PMID 23152255.

Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:17, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another:

Woodywoodpeckerthe3rd (talk) 20:59, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Antidepressants decrease suicide risk section should be removed completely

Content should be completely removed regarding "decreased suicide risk". The section reads like a pharmaceutical company advertisement and. Perhaps a new article should be started for this PHARMA advertisement? The information cited in the content that should be removed is from an article sponsored and with data SUPPLIED by the pharmaceutical industry. Here is the footnote from the very article the section cites and uses for its sole content or advertisement.

"Additional Contributions: Data were supplied by the National Institute of Mental Health (Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study), Wyeth, and Eli Lilly and Co.

Financial Disclosure: Dr Gibbons has served as an expert witness for . . ."Wyeth, and Pfizer Pharmaceuticals in cases related to antidepressants and anticonvulsants and suicide. Dr Brown directed a suicide prevention program at the University of South Florida that received funding from JDS Pharmaceuticals. Dr Mann has received research support from GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.64.242.173 (talkcontribs) 17:59, 16 November 2014‎

please read all of WP:MEDRS but particularly Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine)#Assess_evidence_quality where it says "Do not reject a high-quality type of study due to personal objections to the study's inclusion criteria, references, funding sources, or conclusions." Jytdog (talk) 18:04, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Would it not be beneficial to include studies noting the positive effects of antidepressants on suicide risk as well as studies showing the negatives? With the complete exclusion of the opposite correlation the article seems inherently biased. Nchiulli (talk) 22:31, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

/* Prevalence */ Copyvio!

Initially, I noted that, given the FDA notes particular difficulties "during ... treatment discontinuation, and when the dose of treatment is being changed", some text in Wikipedia's voice was inappropriate. I removed it and someone reverted, still putting some, but not all of it in Wikipedia's voice. But hwile investigating, I stumbled on the more serious copyright issue.--Elvey(tc) 06:34, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. The tools don't seem to be flagging this properly. Even though the following is from the source, (DupDet · CopyVios) don't seem to find much.

On September 6, 2007, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that the suicide rate in American adolescents, (especially girls, 10 to 24 years old), increased 8% (2003 to 2004), the largest jump in 15 years to 4,599 suicides in Americans ages 10 to 24 in 2004, from 4,232 in 2003, giving a suicide rate of 7.32 per 100,000 people that age. The rate previously dropped to 6.78 per 100,000 in 2003 from 9.48 per 100,000 in 1990.Jon Jureidini, a critic of this study, says that the US “2004 suicide figures were compared simplistically with the previous year, rather than examining the change in trends over several years”. The pitfalls of such attempts to infer a trend using just two data points (years 2003 and 2004) are further demonstrated by the fact that, according to the new epidemiological data, the suicide rate in 2005 in children and adolescents actually declined despite the continuing decrease of SSRI prescriptions. “It is risky to draw conclusions from limited ecologic analyses of isolated year-to-year fluctuations in antidepressant prescriptions and suicides.

One promising epidemiological approach involves examining the associations between trends in psychotropic medication use and suicide over time across a large number of small geographic regions. Until the results of more detailed analyses are known, prudence dictates deferring judgment concerning the public health effects of the FDA warnings.” Subsequest follow-up studies have supported the hypothesis that antidepressant drugs reduce suicide risk.

A 2009 study showed increased risk of suicide after initiation, titration, and discontinuation of medication. A study of 159,810 users of either amytriptyline, fluoxetine, paroxetine or dothiepin found that the risk of suicidal behavior is increased in the first month after starting antidepressants, especially during the first 1 to 9 days.

Another study was taken the overall rate of suicidal acts was 27 per 1000 person-years, and most events occurred within 6 months of medication initiation. According to this study, no commonly used antidepressant medication has an advantage in regard to suicide-related safety. It remains a question as to whether other therapeutic maneuvers, such as ongoing counseling, provide a protective counter-effect to children’s and adolescents’ antidepressant-associated risk of suicidal thoughts or behaviour. Source: http://ornatehealth.com/adverse-effects-of-anti-depressants/#sthash.LfMSVFq6.dpuf

I don't think Ornatehealth is a RS anyway. --Elvey(tc) 06:42, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You failed to check the date of the Ornatehealth source vs the date the text was added here. I think you will find that the copy/paste goes the other way. Jytdog (talk) 07:19, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

working over

reviewed this, sourcing was bad. have gone through pubmed search linked in the header above and pulled out reviews going back through 2014 - will be revising based on them. stopping for tonight. Jytdog (talk) 06:34, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, looking at doi:10.1136/bmj.i65 it seems much of the pre-2016 data was systematically biased, or am I reading it wrong? LeadSongDog come howl! 20:02, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]