SynthesisBMJ open2024
Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychotropic prescribing: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- The COVID-19 pandemic's impact on psychotropic medication prescriptions for children and adolescents: a scoping review of quantitative longitudinal studies.Annals of general psychiatry · 2026Review
- Personalizing Antidepressant Therapy: Integrating Pharmacogenomics, Therapeutic Drug Monitoring, and Digital Tools for Improved Depression Outcomes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Psychotropic medication consumption before and after onset of COVID-19 pandemic in 91 countries and regions: a time-series analysis.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025Article
- Five years after the pandemic: rethinking the pharmacological management of mental disorders.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe global prevalence of mental health disorders has risen significantly since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic has additionally caused disruption to mental health services, leading to a shift from in-person to remote service delivery. Given its long-term impact, it has become critical to evaluate whether changes in health delivery during the pandemic have had an effect on prescribing patterns for commonly prescribed psychotropic drugs. This study aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on changes in psychotropic prescribing patterns in adults, as well as differences in prescribing in different healthcare delivery approaches across various geographical contexts. DESIGN AND ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS: Systematic review of cohort, interrupted time-series and cross-sectional studies examining prescribing trends for at least one commonly prescribed psychotropic drug during and after COVID-19 in accessing care remotely or face to face between 1 January 2020 and 17 June 2022. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, HMIC and PsycINFO databases were searched in addition to citation chaining of relevant reviews. EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Study screening, data extraction and quality assessment were completed by two independent reviewers. The PECO strategy was used to devise the systematic review and findings were synthesised narratively.
results16 studies were eligible for inclusion. Studies documenting changes in psychotropic prescribing trends provided very conflicting findings. There were no stark differences in prescribing outcomes between different healthcare delivery methods (ie, face-to-face consultations vs remote consultations). A noteworthy finding was that the prescribing rate of benzodiazepines was higher in women than men. No particular trends were observed for the prescription rates of hypnotics, antidepressants or antipsychotics.
conclusionsFindings support mixed trends in the prescription of psychotropic medications in a range of settings, hindering conclusive statements on COVID-19's impact on prescribing. In areas where remote consultations are in use, more comprehensive research is required to assess the safety of prescribing in these settings to inform public health policy and assess if the observed trends in our systematic review persist over time (given the increased consideration of remote and telehealth care in delivering services), particularly the safe and effective deployment of these services.
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.