Review: Antidepressants may increase risk of self-harm or suicidal behaviour in children and adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dubicka B, Hadley S, Roberts C. Suicidal behaviour in youths with depression treated with new-generation antidepressants: meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry 2006;189:393–8.[OpenUrl][1][Abstract/FREE Full Text][2] Q Do antidepressants increase the risk of self-harm or suicidal behaviour in children and adolescents? ### ![Graphic][3]</img>Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis. ### ![Graphic][4]</img>Data sources: UK Committee for Safety of Medicines (CSM) review up to January 2004; Medline and PsycINFO from January 2004 to August 2005; the Cochrane Database; the GlaxoSmithKline website for paroxetine, and contact with researchers in the field. ### ![Graphic][5]</img>Study selection and analysis: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children and adolescents with a major depressive disorder comparing antidepressants versus placebo for 8–12 weeks. ### ![Graphic][6]</img>Outcomes: Suicide-related events (attempted suicide, suicidal thoughts or self-harm from CSM data; or worsening suicide ideation or suicide attempt or both from Treatment for Adolescents with Depression Study). Sixteen RCTs met inclusion criteria (n = 2741; … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DThe%2BBritish%2BJournal%2Bof%2BPsychiatry%26rft.stitle%253DBr.%2BJ.%2BPsychiatry%26rft.aulast%253DDUBICKA%26rft.auinit1%253DB.%26rft.volume%253D189%26rft.issue%253D5%26rft.spage%253D393%26rft.epage%253D398%26rft.atitle%253DSuicidal%2Bbehaviour%2Bin%2Byouths%2Bwith%2Bdepression%2Btreated%2Bwith%2Bnew-generation%2Bantidepressants%253A%2BMeta-analysis%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1192%252Fbjp.bp.105.011833%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F17077427%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/ijlink?linkType=ABST&journalCode=bjprcpsych&resid=189/5/393&atom=%2Febmental%2F10%2F3%2F89.atom [3]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [4]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-4.gif
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".