read me him…

Posted on Saturday 21 June 2014

I’m about to hit the road to visit an old friend on the other end of the South for a few days and will be out of pocket, but I didn’t want to take off without linking to this article about the BMJ study at hand [Changes in antidepressant use by young people and suicidal behavior after FDA warnings and media coverage: quasi-experimental study].

I give it an A+!
PLoS Blogs
By Adrian Preda M.D.
June 21, 2014

A new study just published in the BMJ makes this very point [Changes in antidepressant use by young people and suicidal behavior after FDA warnings and media coverage: quasi-experimental study]

The title makes two claims:
  1. That the  2003 black box  US Food and Drug Administration warning about possible increased risk of suicidality with antidepressants lead to a change in antidepressant prescriptions.
  2. Further, that there were changes in suicidal behavior following the said US FDAwarning.
While the title does not indicate the direction of the changes, the study conclusions carry little ambiguity:
    Safety warnings about antidepressants and widespread media coverage decreased antidepressant use, and there were simultaneous increases in suicide attempts among young people.
This is obviously a big claim, with far reaching implications spreading from the level of primary care physicians who might consider changing their antidepressant prescription practices to the level of policy makers deciding on guidelines about antidepressants approvals and reimbursement. In this post we will discuss some of the study limitations that, for unclear reasons, seem to have been all but ignored by the over-excited welcome that study received in the mainstream media. Our goal here is to not discuss subtle academic limitations but rather obvious limitations which could have been picked even by a casual yet critical reader of the paper. We will then cursorily survey the media presentations of the paper and assess the quality of their review in terms of balance and fair criticism. Let’s start with some of the study most overt shortcomings:
  1. The title is not entirely informative. The study reviews US data however the title seems to indicate world-wide findings.
  2. The study uses a quasi-experimental design assessing changes in outcomes after the FDA  warnings, controlling for pre-existing trends. However the reliability of the controls is not entirely convincing.
  3. Not much is known about the relationship (if any) between the individuals entered in the study because they were prescribed antidepressants and the individuals who took psychotropic overdoses.
  4. The study uses psychotropic drug poising data as a proxy for suicide but is that a good proxi?
  5. The study does not address the possibility that suicide has been on the raise for reasons having nothing to do with antidepressant prescriptions (such as the recent years economic crisis).

Big media enthusiastic welcomes

First the Washington Post (Dennis) reports:
    As a result [of the FDA warnings] antidepressant prescriptions fell sharply for adolescents age 10 to 17 and for young adults age 18 to 29. At the same time, researchers found that the number of suicide attempts rose by more that 20 percent in adolescents and by more than a third in young adults.
Comment from a non-study affiliated expert? YES
How many limitations are discussed? NONE

According to NBC News (Raymond) :
    New research finds the warning backfired, causing an increase in suicide attempts by teens and young adults. After the FDA advisories and final black box warning that was issued in October 2004 and the media coverage surrounding this issue, the use of antidepressants in young people dropped by up to 31 percent.
Comment from a non-study affiliated expert? NO
How many limitations are discussed? NONE

Reuters (Seaman) reports that:
    Antidepressant use decreased by 31 percent among adolescents, about 24 percent among young adults and about 15 percent among adults after the warnings were issued. At the same time, there were increases in the number of adolescents and young adults receiving medical attention for overdosing on psychiatric medicines, which the authors say is an accurate way to measure suicide attempts. Those poisoning increased by about 22 percent among adolescents and about 34 percent among young adults after the warnings. That translates to two additional poisoning per 100,000 adolescents and four more poisoning per 1,000 young adults, the researchers write.
Comment from a non-study affiliated expert? YES
How many limitations are discussed? ONE (limitation #5)

According to USA TODAY (Painter):
    Warnings that antidepressant medications might prompt suicidal thinking in some young people may have backfired, resulting in more suicide attempts, new research suggests.
Comment from a non-study affiliated expert? YES
How many limitations are discussed? NONE

    Antidepressant use fell 31 percent among adolescents and 24 percent among young adults after the FDA warnings, according to the study. Suicide attempts increased by almost 22 percent among adolescents and 33 percent among young adults in the same time period. Suicide attempts tracked in the study were largely the result of drug overdoses.
Comment from a non-study affiliated expert? NO
How many limitations are discussed? NONE

NPR (Stein) also reports on the story:
    Antidepressant use nationally fell 31 percent among adolescents and 24 percent among young adults, the researchers reported. Suicide attempts increased by almost 22 percent among adolescents and 33 percent among young adults.
Comment from a non-study affiliated expert? YES
How many limitations are discussed? ONE (limitation #5)

Finally, the Boston Globe (Freyer) concludes that
    instead of declining as hoped, suicide attempts over the next six years showed a “small but meaningful” uptick among people ages 10 to 29, according to a study published Wednesday in the journal BMJ. That increase followed a substantial drop in the use of antidepressants.
Comment from a non-study affiliated expert? YES
How many limitations are discussed? NONE

Final conclusions

Somewhat paradoxically, a study that tongue-in-cheek points to the media’s uncritical coverage of medical news as a possible contributor to a public health issue receives an almost universal and equally uncritical acclaim from the same media that it rightfully criticizes. In a past analysis of medical news reporting I stated that
    In closing: my hope is that members of the media who cover [medical] debate[s] will realize that “first do no harm” is not only the duty of physicians; it is also the responsibility of anyone trusted with giving health information to the public at large.
More than 2 years later I found that this conclusion still stands…
  1.  
    June 21, 2014 | 11:36 AM
     

    Some interesting comments by Profs Healy, Gøtzsche, Carroll etc in response to this study on antidepressants http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g3596?tab=responses

  2.  
    June 21, 2014 | 5:01 PM
     

    Overdosing on psychiatric drugs is a very bad way to commit suicide, and I think most people, even teens, know that.

    Quasi-experimental! What does “quasi-experimental” mean? Finding correlations and attributing causation to them? Rationalizing an intuition?

    Yet another addition to the quasi-experimental garbage heap that is psychiatry’s evidence base.

    Sure, it got lots of press — because everyone still wants to believe antidepressants are wonder drugs.

  3.  
    Arby
    June 21, 2014 | 10:10 PM
     

    Thank you, Mick. The comments are really interesting.

    But on the public front in the general press we hear nothing of this debate.

    On another note, the NPR article on this subject included a quote from Robert D. Gibbons, PhD. Not that this isn’t in his world, but it is always interesting when certain names keep appearing, especially when I noticed that his quote didn’t refer to statistics or psychometrics.

  4.  
    Arby
    June 21, 2014 | 10:29 PM
     

    Ok, I apologize for the second time now that I have pointed out something that Dr. Nardo has already has mentioned in a prior article. This would be the quote in NPR article. I read it when the article first hit the media in the feeds I am compelled to monitor for my social media work, and it has been bothering me ever since.

  5.  
    June 22, 2014 | 7:36 AM
     

    Arby,

    No apology required. I found Gibbons because I searched for him, hypothesizing he couldn’t be far away – and he wasn’t. Say “black box” and he comes a running…

  6.  
    June 29, 2014 | 6:50 AM
     

    Usually I don’t read post on blogs, but I wish to say that this write-up very pressured me
    to try and do so! Your writing style has been amazed me.

    Thank you, quite nice post.

  7.  
    June 29, 2014 | 8:15 PM
     

    The corporate owned media has long since abandoned the ethics of reporting truth and doing good investigative journalism. The ownership is cross-linked with all the major transnational corporations including Big Pharma. See

    https://www.mentalhealthacademy.com.au/author_details.php?authorid=6562

    The only real answers seem to be (1) get politicians in all countries especially the USA (but here in Australia democracy is increasingly bought and paid for too) off campaign funding by private individuals and corporations; (2) educate people so that there is high level scepticism of the mainstream media and they’re forced to publish truth or perish.

    On the weekend I came across the campaign led by Harvard law professor and constitutional expert, Lawrence Lessig. There is an urgent campaign worth donating to, this would go to the heart of the multitude of pressing problems facing us all. See –
    http://www.mayday.us

  8.  
    June 29, 2014 | 8:16 PM
     

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.