No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundIn 2003, the Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM) advised against treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) other than fluoxetine in children, due to a possible increased risk of suicidal behaviour. This study examined the effects of this safety warning on general practitioners' depression diagnosing and prescription behaviour in children.Methods and FindingsWe identified a cohort of 1,502,753 children (<18 y; registered with GP for >6 m) in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) UK primary care database. Trends in incidence of depression diagnoses, symptoms and antidepressant prescribing were examined 1995–2009, accounting for deprivation, age and gender. We used segmented regression analysis to assess changes in prescription rates. Overall, 45,723 (3%) children had ≥1 depression-related entry in their clinical records. SSRIs were prescribed to 16,925 (1%) of children. SSRI prescription rates decreased from 3.2 (95%CI:3.0,3.3) per 1,000 person-years at risk (PYAR) in 2002 to 1.7 (95%CI:1.7,1.8) per 1,000 PYAR in 2005, but have since risen to 2.7 (95%CI:2.6,2.8) per 1,000 PYAR in 2009. Prescription rates for CSM-contraindicated SSRIs citalopram, sertraline and especially paroxetine dropped dramatically after 2002, while rates for fluoxetine and amitriptyline remained stable. After 2005 rates for all antidepressants, except paroxetine and imipramine, started to rise again. Rates for depression diagnoses dropped from 3.0 (95%CI:2.8,3.1) per 1,000 PYAR in 2002 to 2.0 (95%CI:1.9,2.1) per 1,000 PYAR in 2005 and have been stable since. Recording of symptoms saw a steady increase from 1.0 (95%CI:0.8,1.2) per 1,000 PYAR in 1995 to 4.7 (95%CI:4.5,4.8) per 1,000 PYAR in 2009.ConclusionsThe rates of depression diagnoses and SSRI prescriptions showed a significant drop around the time of the CSM advice, which was not present in the recording of symptoms. This could indicate caution on the part of GPs in making depression diagnoses and prescribing antidepressants following the CSM advice.

SummaryBackgroundChild mortality is almost twice as high in England compared with Sweden. We aimed to establish the extent to which adverse birth characteristics and socioeconomic factors explain this difference.MethodsWe developed nationally representative cohorts of singleton livebirths between Jan 1, 2003, and Dec 31, 2012, using the Hospital Episode Statistics in England, and the Swedish Medical Birth Register in Sweden, with longitudinal follow-up from linked hospital admissions and mortality records. We analysed mortality as the outcome, based on deaths from any cause at age 2–27 days, 28–364 days, and 1–4 years. We fitted Cox proportional hazard regression models to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) for England compared with Sweden in all three age groups. The models were adjusted for birth characteristics (gestational age, birthweight, sex, and congenital anomalies), and for socioeconomic factors (maternal age and socioeconomic status).FindingsThe English cohort comprised 3 932 886 births and 11 392 deaths and the Swedish cohort comprised 1 013 360 births and 1927 deaths. The unadjusted HRs for England compared with Sweden were 1·66 (95% CI 1·53–1·81) at 2–27 days, 1·59 (1·47–1·71) at 28–364 days, and 1·27 (1·15–1·40) at 1–4 years. At 2–27 days, 77% of the excess risk of death in England was explained by birth characteristics and a further 3% by socioeconomic factors. At 28–364 days, 68% of the excess risk of death in England was explained by birth characteristics and a further 11% by socioeconomic factors. At 1–4 years, the adjusted HR did not indicate a significant difference between countries.InterpretationExcess child mortality in England compared with Sweden was largely explained by the unfavourable distribution of birth characteristics in England. Socioeconomic factors contributed to these differences through associations with adverse birth characteristics and increased mortality after 1 month of age. Policies to reduce child mortality in England could have most impact by reducing adverse birth characteristics through improving the health of women before and during pregnancy and reducing socioeconomic disadvantage.FundingThe Farr Institute of Health Informatics Research (through the Medical Research Council, Arthritis Research UK, British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Chief Scientist Office, Economic and Social Research Council, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, National Institute for Social Care and Health Research, and the Wellcome Trust).