SynthesisNeuroscience and biobehavioral reviews2024
Why we need to pursue both universal and targeted prevention to reduce the incidence of affective and psychotic disorders: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-world comprehensive care of people living with schizophrenia: recommendations across different settings and clinical stages.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026Article
- Child and adolescent psychiatry: challenges, solutions, opportunities, and future directions.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026Article
- Transdiagnostic prevention in youth mental health, Part II: interventions.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Review
- Exploring causal mechanisms of psychosis risk.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The effectiveness of universal preventive approaches in reducing the incidence of affective/psychotic disorders is unclear. We therefore aimed to synthesise the available evidence from randomised controlled trials. For studies reporting change in prevalence, we simulated all possible scenarios for the proportion of individuals with the disorder at baseline and at follow-up to exclude them. We then combined these data with studies directly measuring incidence and conducted random effects meta-analysis with relative risk (RR) to estimate the incidence in the intervention group compared to the control group. Eighteen studies (k=21 samples) were included investigating the universal prevention of depression in 66,625 individuals. No studies were available investigating universal prevention on the incidence of bipolar/psychotic disorders. 63 % of simulated scenarios showed a significant preventive effect on reducing the incidence of depression (k=9 - 19, RR=0.75-0.94, 95 %CIs=0.55-0.87,0.93-1.15, p=0.007-0.246) but did not survive sensitivity analyses. There is some limited evidence for the effectiveness of universal interventions for reducing the incidence of depression but not for bipolar/psychotic disorders.
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.