Interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) and antidepressant medications are both first-line interventions for adult depression, but their relative efficacy in the long term and on outcome measures other than depressive symptomatology is unknown. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses can provide more precise effect estimates than conventional meta-analyses. This IPD meta-analysis compared the efficacy of IPT and antidepressants on various outcomes at post-treatment and follow-up (PROSPERO: CRD42020219891). A systematic literature search conducted May 1st, 2023 identified randomized trials comparing IPT and antidepressants in acute-phase treatment of adults with depression. Anonymized IPD were requested and analyzed using mixed-effects models. The prespecified primary outcome was post-treatment depression symptom severity. Secondary outcomes were all post-treatment and follow-up measures assessed in at least two studies. IPD were obtained from 9 of 15 studies identified (N = 1536/1948, 78.9%). No significant comparative treatment effects were found on post-treatment measures of depression (d = 0.088, p = 0.103, N = 1530) and social functioning (d = 0.026, p = 0.624, N = 1213). In smaller samples, antidepressants performed slightly better than IPT on post-treatment measures of general psychopathology (d = 0.276, p = 0.023, N = 307) and dysfunctional attitudes (d = 0.249, p = 0.029, N = 231), but not on any other secondary outcomes, nor at follow-up. This IPD meta-analysis is the first to examine the acute and longer-term efficacy of IPT v. antidepressants on a broad range of outcomes. Depression treatment trials should routinely include multiple outcome measures and follow-up assessments.

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to the irrational use of drugs in the absence of clinical management guidelines. Access to individual participant data (IPD) from clinical trials aids the evidence synthesis approaches. We undertook a rapid review to infer IPD sharing intentions based on data availability statements by the principal investigators (PIs) of drug and vaccine trials in the context of COVID-19.

Searches were conducted on PubMed (NCBI). We considered randomized controlled trial (RCT) publications from January 1, 2020, to October 31, 2021. IPD sharing intentions were inferred based on the data availability statements in the full-text manuscript publications. We included 180 articles. Of these, 81.7% (147/180) of the publications have arrived from the findings of the RCTs alone, 12.8% (23/180) of the publications were protocol publications alone, and 5.6% (10/180) of the RCTs had both published protocol and publication from the trial findings. We have reported IPD sharing intentions separately in RCT protocol publications (n = 23 + 10) and publications from RCT findings (n = 147 + 10). Among RCT protocol publications, one-third (11/33) of the PIs intended to share IPD. In fact, over half of the PIs (52.2%, 82/157) in their published RCT findings intended to share IPD. However, information to share about IPD was missing for 57.6% (19/33) of RCT protocols and 38.2% (60/157) of published RCT findings.

Stakeholders must work together to ensure that overarching factors, such as legislation that governs clinical trial practices, are streamlined to bolster IPD sharing mechanisms.

The cornerstone of obesity treatment is behavioural weight management, resulting in significant improvements in cardio-metabolic and psychosocial health. However, there is ongoing concern that dietary interventions used for weight management may precipitate the development of eating disorders. Systematic reviews demonstrate that, while for most participants medically supervised obesity treatment improves risk scores related to eating disorders, a subset of people who undergo obesity treatment may have poor outcomes for eating disorders. This review summarises the background and rationale for the formation of the Eating Disorders In weight-related Therapy (EDIT) Collaboration. The EDIT Collaboration will explore the complex risk factor interactions that precede changes to eating disorder risk following weight management. In this review, we also outline the programme of work and design of studies for the EDIT Collaboration, including expected knowledge gains. The EDIT studies explore risk factors and the interactions between them using individual-level data from international weight management trials. Combining all available data on eating disorder risk from weight management trials will allow sufficient sample size to interrogate our hypothesis: that individuals undertaking weight management interventions will vary in their eating disorder risk profile, on the basis of personal characteristics and intervention strategies available to them. The collaboration includes the integration of health consumers in project development and translation. An important knowledge gain from this project is a comprehensive understanding of the impact of weight management interventions on eating disorder risk.