Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 4, 2025
Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
Published on: April 19, 2024
The analysis and reporting of multiple outcomes in mental health trials: a methodological systematic review
Dominic Stringer1, Mollie Payne2, Ben Carter2
1Department of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Kings College London, London, UK. Dominic.stringer@kcl.ac.uk.
Background:
The choice of a single primary outcome in randomised trials can be difficult, especially in mental health where interventions may be complex and target several outcomes simultaneously. We carried out a systematic review to assess the quality of the analysis and reporting of multiple outcomes in mental health RCTs, comparing approaches with current CONSORT and other regulatory guidance.
Methods:
The review included all late-stage mental health trials published between 1st January 2019 to 31st December 2020 in 9 leading medical and mental health journals. Pilot and feasibility trials, non-randomised trials, and early phase trials were excluded. The total number of primary, secondary and other outcomes was recorded, as was any strategy used to incorporate multiple primary outcomes in the primary analysis.
Results:
There were 147 included mental health trials. Most trials (101/147) followed CONSORT guidance by specifying a single primary outcome with other outcomes defined as secondary and analysed in separate statistical analyses, although a minority (10/147) did not specify any outcomes as primary. Where multiple primary outcomes were specified (33/147), most (26/33) did not correct for multiplicity, contradicting regulatory guidance. The median number of clinical outcomes reported across studies was 8 (IQR 5-11 ).
Conclusions:
Most trials are correctly following CONSORT guidance. However, there was little consideration given to multiplicity or correlation between outcomes even where multiple primary outcomes were stated. Trials should correct for multiplicity when multiple primary outcomes are specified or describe some other strategy to address the multiplicity. Overall, very few mental health trials are taking advantage of multiple outcome strategies in the primary analysis, especially more complex strategies such as multivariate modelling. More work is required to show these exist, aid interpretation, increase efficiency and are easily implemented.
Registration:
Our systematic review protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on 11th January 2023 (CRD42023382274).
More Related Videos
04:34Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Shugan Jieyu Capsules for the Treatment of Insomnia
Published on: February 17, 2023
06:05The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score PRIUS: A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
Related Concept Videos
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:20Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
01:16Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
01:11Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
01:23McNemar's Test
01:09Odds Ratio