Does Publication Bias Inflate the Apparent Efficacy of Psychological Treatment for Major Depressive Disorder? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of US National Institutes of Health-Funded Trials
- PMID: 26422604
- PMCID: PMC4589340
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0137864
Does Publication Bias Inflate the Apparent Efficacy of Psychological Treatment for Major Depressive Disorder? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of US National Institutes of Health-Funded Trials
Abstract
Background: The efficacy of antidepressant medication has been shown empirically to be overestimated due to publication bias, but this has only been inferred statistically with regard to psychological treatment for depression. We assessed directly the extent of study publication bias in trials examining the efficacy of psychological treatment for depression.
Methods and findings: We identified US National Institutes of Health grants awarded to fund randomized clinical trials comparing psychological treatment to control conditions or other treatments in patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder for the period 1972-2008, and we determined whether those grants led to publications. For studies that were not published, data were requested from investigators and included in the meta-analyses. Thirteen (23.6%) of the 55 funded grants that began trials did not result in publications, and two others never started. Among comparisons to control conditions, adding unpublished studies (Hedges' g = 0.20; CI95% -0.11~0.51; k = 6) to published studies (g = 0.52; 0.37~0.68; k = 20) reduced the psychotherapy effect size point estimate (g = 0.39; 0.08~0.70) by 25%. Moreover, these findings may overestimate the "true" effect of psychological treatment for depression as outcome reporting bias could not be examined quantitatively.
Conclusion: The efficacy of psychological interventions for depression has been overestimated in the published literature, just as it has been for pharmacotherapy. Both are efficacious but not to the extent that the published literature would suggest. Funding agencies and journals should archive both original protocols and raw data from treatment trials to allow the detection and correction of outcome reporting bias. Clinicians, guidelines developers, and decision makers should be aware that the published literature overestimates the effects of the predominant treatments for depression.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures
Comment in
-
[Psychotherapeutic treatments in major depression: the literature shows a very optimistic picture].Rev Med Suisse. 2015 Nov 18;11(495):2200. Rev Med Suisse. 2015. PMID: 26742246 French. No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Comparative effectiveness of continuation and maintenance treatments for persistent depressive disorder in adults.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 May 20;5(5):CD012855. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012855.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. PMID: 31106850 Free PMC article.
-
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36321557 Free PMC article.
-
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12. Early Hum Dev. 2020. PMID: 33036834
-
Is there an excess of significant findings in published studies of psychotherapy for depression?Psychol Med. 2015 Jan;45(2):439-46. doi: 10.1017/S0033291714001421. Epub 2014 Jul 25. Psychol Med. 2015. PMID: 25062429 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs for the acute treatment of adults with major depressive disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Lancet. 2018 Apr 7;391(10128):1357-1366. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32802-7. Epub 2018 Feb 21. Lancet. 2018. PMID: 29477251 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Low dissemination rates, non-transparency of trial premature cessation and late registration in child mental health: observational study of registered interventional trials.Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020 Jun;29(6):813-825. doi: 10.1007/s00787-019-01392-8. Epub 2019 Sep 5. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020. PMID: 31486894
-
Corticospinal and spinal adaptations following lower limb motor skill training: a meta-analysis with best evidence synthesis.Exp Brain Res. 2023 Mar;241(3):807-824. doi: 10.1007/s00221-023-06563-3. Epub 2023 Feb 5. Exp Brain Res. 2023. PMID: 36740653 Review.
-
Antipsychotic polypharmacy and metabolic syndrome in schizophrenia: a review of systematic reviews.BMC Psychiatry. 2018 Sep 3;18(1):275. doi: 10.1186/s12888-018-1848-y. BMC Psychiatry. 2018. PMID: 30176844 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Reporting bias in imaging: higher accuracy is linked to faster publication.Eur Radiol. 2018 Sep;28(9):3632-3639. doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5354-x. Epub 2018 Mar 21. Eur Radiol. 2018. PMID: 29564596
-
Suicidality and aggression during antidepressant treatment: systematic review and meta-analyses based on clinical study reports.BMJ. 2016 Jan 27;352:i65. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i65. BMJ. 2016. PMID: 26819231 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Dickersin K. The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence. JAMA. 1990;263: 1385–1389. - PubMed
-
- Rosenthal R. The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results. Psychol Bull. 1979;86: 638–641.
-
- Kessler RC, Berglund P, Demler O, Jin R, Koretz D, Merikangas KR, et al. The epidemiology of major depressive disorder: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R). JAMA. 2003;289: 3095–3105. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
