Evidence Hub

Comparative efficacy of antidepressant medication for adolescent depression: a network meta-analysis and systematic review

Wu T, Song F, Cao W, Liu C, Jia S

BMC psychiatry, 2025

12,258 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the success rate of different antidepressants in addressing depression among teenagers, while also offering substantiation for the efficacy and tolerability of these treatments in this demographic.

Methods: Participants were adolescents aged 6-18 years diagnosed with major depressive disorder according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) , Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders (CCMD-3) or equivalent diagnostic criteria (e.g., Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition(DSM-4) , International Classification of Diseases, Tenth/Eleventh Revision(ICD10/11) ) . We conducted a systematic search of major databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to October 2024. The search strategy included the following keywords: "Depression," "Depressive Disorders," "Emotional Disorders," "adolescent," "young adult, " "minors," "fluoxetine," "sertraline," "paroxetine," "agomelatine," "vilazodone," "escitalopram," and "venlafaxine."

Results: Our network meta-analysis(NMA) included 15 RCTs involving 12,258 participants. The included studies were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The majority of studies had low risk of bias in terms of randomization and allocation concealment, while some studies had unclear implementation of blinding or outcome assessment. The NMA results showed that in several major indicators Children's Depression…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 12,258 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free