Burden and Risk of Depression in Patients Receiving Semaglutide: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Abstract
Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), including semaglutide, are widely used for Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), obesity and related metabolic conditions. Evidence on potential neuropsychiatric effects remains inconsistent. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated depression risk among patients receiving semaglutide. Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, major biomedical databases, trial registries, pharmacovigilance databases, conference abstracts and grey literature were searched from inception to January 2026. Eligible studies included randomised controlled trials, observational studies, large database analyses and pharmacovigilance disproportionality studies involving patients receiving semaglutide. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The pooled risk ratio for depression was 1.25 (95% CI: 0.95-1.65; I2 = 98%). For anxiety and suicidal ideation/attempt, pooled risk ratios were 1.22 (95% CI: 0.93-1.60; I2 = 99%) and 1.20 (95% CI: 0.90-1.62; I2 = 92%), respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between semaglutide and comparator/placebo groups for outcomes. Pooled estimates did not show a statistically significant increase in depression, anxiety or suicidal ideation/attempt among patients receiving semaglutide compared with comparator groups. However, the certainty of evidence was limited by substantial heterogeneity, risk of bias and reliance on heterogeneous data sources, including…
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.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Regulation of nucleolus assembly by non-coding RNA polymerase II transcripts
- For a Healthy Histone Code, a Little SUMO in the Tail Keeps the Acetyl Away
- Discovering a binary CTCF code with a little help from BORIS
- Article Commentary: Stabilizing the Code–-Methods to Preserve RNA Prove Their Worth
- Foreword to the Special Issue for the RINTC (The Implicit Seismic Risk of Code-Conforming Structures) Project
- Commentary: Promoting Health and Well-being in Pediatric Primary Care Settings: Using Health and Behavior Codes at Routine Well-child Visits
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.