SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2022
Pharmacological interventions for people with borderline personality disorder.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
51 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 97 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genome-wide association analyses of borderline personality disorder identify 11 loci and highlight shared risk with mental and somatic disorders.Nature genetics · 2026Pooled it
- Factors That Influence Prescribing in Borderline Personality Disorder: A Systematic Review.Personality and mental health · 2025Pooled it
- Pharmacological interventions for co-occurring psychopathology in people with borderline personality disorder: secondary analysis of the Cochrane systematic review with meta-analyses.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2025Pooled it
- Pharmacological interventions for people with borderline personality disorder.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Crisis interventions for adults with borderline personality disorder.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic Review of the Effectiveness and Experiences of Treatment for Men With Borderline Personality Disorder.American journal of men's healthPooled it
- A qualitative description of the daily living functioning of people diagnosed with borderline personality disorder from consumer, carer and clinician perspectives.Australian occupational therapy journal · 2026Review
- Central nervous system acting medication used by young adults with borderline personality disorder in Sweden 2006-2019.Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- A scoping review of programmes that address the daily living functioning of people diagnosed with borderline personality disorder.The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2026Article
- Systematic review: Efficacy of off-label antipsychotic use in children and adolescents with obsessive-compulsive, mood dysregulation, depression, anxiety, and sleep-related disorders.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2026Review
- Treatment trajectories of patients with borderline personality disorder prescribed pharmacotherapy: real-world insights from a retrospective observational study.BMC psychiatry · 2026Observational
- Antipsychotic treatment patterns and cardiometabolic medicine use: current real-world evidence.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2026Article
- "It seems like they are guessing": a qualitative study of the prescribing process from the perspective of individuals diagnosed with personality disorder.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Borderline personality disorder in East Asian adolescents: a comprehensive review of research on assessment, etiology, and treatment.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Revisiting the prevalence of bipolar disorder: implications of a broader spectrum model.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Article
- Research Review: What we have learned about early detection and intervention of borderline personality disorder.Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines · 2025Review
- Antipsychotic off-label use in the 21st century: An enduring public health concern.Dialogues in clinical neuroscience · 2025Review
- Borderline Personality Disorder or First-Episode Psychosis? Challenges in Assessing Psychotic Features in Early Intervention: A Case Report.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Practice Assessment Tool for the Care of Patients With Borderline Personality Disorder.Focus (American Psychiatric Publishing) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAmong people with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (BPD) who are engaged in clinical care, prescription rates of psychotropic medications are high, despite the fact that medication use is off-label as a treatment for BPD. Nevertheless, people with BPD often receive several psychotropic drugs at a time for sustained periods.
objectivesTo assess the effects of pharmacological treatment for people with BPD. SEARCH
methodsFor this update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 14 other databases and four trials registers up to February 2022. We contacted researchers working in the field to ask for additional data from published and unpublished trials, and handsearched relevant journals. We did not restrict the search by year of publication, language or type of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing pharmacological treatment to placebo, other pharmacologic treatments or a combination of pharmacologic treatments in people of all ages with a formal diagnosis of BPD. The primary outcomes were BPD symptom severity, self-harm, suicide-related outcomes, and psychosocial functioning. Secondary outcomes were individual BPD symptoms, depression, attrition and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's risk of bias tool and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We performed data analysis using Review Manager 5 and quantified the statistical reliability of the data using Trial Sequential Analysis. MAIN
resultsWe included 46 randomised controlled trials (2769 participants) in this review, 45 of which were eligible for quantitative analysis and comprised 2752 participants with BPD in total. This is 18 more trials than the 2010 review on this topic. Participants were predominantly female except for one trial that included men only. The mean age ranged from 16.2 to 39.7 years across the included trials. Twenty-nine different types of medications compared to placebo or other medications were included in the analyses. Seventeen trials were funded or partially funded by the pharmaceutical industry, 10 were funded by universities or research foundations, eight received no funding, and 11 had unclear funding. For all reported effect sizes, negative effect estimates indicate beneficial effects by active medication. Compared with placebo, no difference in effects were observed on any of the primary outcomes at the end of treatment for any medication. Compared with placebo, medication may have little to no effect on BPD symptom severity, although the evidence is of very low certainty (antipsychotics: SMD -0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.45 to 0.08; 8 trials, 951 participants; antidepressants: SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.65 to 1.18; 2 trials, 87 participants; mood stabilisers: SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.57; 4 trials, 265 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of medication compared with placebo on self-harm, indicating little to no effect (antipsychotics: RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.84; 2 trials, 76 participants; antidepressants: MD 0.45 points on the Overt Aggression Scale-Modified-Self-Injury item (0-5 points), 95% CI -10.55 to 11.45; 1 trial, 20 participants; mood stabilisers: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.48; 1 trial, 276 participants). The evidence is also very uncertain about the effect of medication compared with placebo on suicide-related outcomes, with little to no effect (antipsychotics: SMD 0.05, 95 % CI -0.18 to 0.29; 7 trials, 854 participants; antidepressants: SMD -0.26, 95% CI -1.62 to 1.09; 2 trials, 45 participants; mood stabilisers: SMD -0.36, 95% CI -1.96 to 1.25; 2 trials, 44 participants). Very low-certainty evidence shows little to no difference between medication and placebo on psychosocial functioning (antipsychotics: SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.00; 7 trials, 904 participants; antidepressants: SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.06; 4 trials, 161 participants; mood stabilisers: SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.26; 2 trials, 214 participants). Low-certainty evidence suggests that antipsychotics may slightly reduce interpersonal problems (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.08; 8 trials, 907 participants), and that mood stabilisers may result in a reduction in this outcome (SMD -0.58, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.02; 4 trials, 300 participants). Antidepressants may have little to no effect on interpersonal problems, but the corresponding evidence is very uncertain (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.55; 2 trials, 119 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about dropout rates compared with placebo by antipsychotics (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.38; 13 trials, 1216 participants). Low-certainty evidence suggests there may be no difference in dropout rates between antidepressants (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.76; 6 trials, 289 participants) and mood stabilisers (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.15; 9 trials, 530 participants), compared to placebo. Reporting on adverse events was poor and mostly non-standardised. The available evidence on non-serious adverse events was of very low certainty for antipsychotics (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.29; 5 trials, 814 participants) and mood stabilisers (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.01; 1 trial, 276 participants). For antidepressants, no data on adverse events were identified. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThis review included 18 more trials than the 2010 version, so larger meta-analyses with more statistical power were feasible. We found mostly very low-certainty evidence that medication may result in no difference in any primary outcome. The rest of the secondary outcomes were inconclusive. Very limited data were available for serious adverse events. The review supports the continued understanding that no pharmacological therapy seems effective in specifically treating BPD pathology. More research is needed to understand the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms of BPD better. Also, more trials including comorbidities such as trauma-related disorders, major depression, substance use disorders, or eating disorders are needed. Additionally, more focus should be put on male and adolescent samples.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.