@ploederl.bsky.social
Clinical psychologist and psychotherapist, part-time researcher with a focus on suicide prevention and psychopharmacology.
https://ploederlm.github.io/publications/
https://scholar.google.at/citations?user=76cO6AEAAAAJ&hl=de
Nature, espresso, cycling.
@ploederl.bsky.socialTime for a re-tweet
@ploederl.bsky.socialGratulation, Hochwürden! 😉
@resurgequality.bsky.socialReposted by @ploederl.bsky.socialNo matter what they decide about clinical significance, not correcting it is definitely not the way to go.
@ploederl.bsky.socialThanks for notifying about this! Fully agree with your comments.
@ploederl.bsky.socialBut the German guidelines conclude that there is "strong evidence" that fluoxetine, sertraline, and escitalopram reduce depression symptoms.
See here (in German):
madindeutschland.org/problematisc...
@ploederl.bsky.socialThat Attari was not rated as high ROB even in the "other" domain is problematic. Does the REB safeguard for "zombie" trials?
@richvn.bsky.socialReposted by @ploederl.bsky.socialNEW: researchers say one 'zombie' study in Iran, 20 years ago, has skewed the world's medical evidence base for using Prozac to treat depression in children.
They stop short of saying don't use Prozac this way, but want clinical guidelines revised.
@ploederl.bsky.socialInteresting thread of @literalbanana.bsky.social on X about our recent zombie-study in the wider context surrounding efficacy of antidepressants for children and adolescents. Thanks!
twitter-thread.com/t/1974884739...
@ploederl.bsky.socialOoops, here is the link:
mmmdata.io/posts/2025/0...
@floriannaudet.bsky.socialReposted by @ploederl.bsky.social🍫 or 💩? About the effect size reported in a trial that shaped the estimated effect of fluoxetine in meta-analyses of pediatric depression, my stellar co-author @ploederl.bsky.social says: “It’s the kind of effect size you only get if you ask people whether they prefer chocolate or faeces.” 👇👇👇
@ploederl.bsky.socialSee this excellent blog by @ianhussey.mmmdata.io
for background on implausible effect sizes, including the reference to the 🍫 vs. 💩 study.
We thought of including this comparison in the paper but did not, in order to avoid being all too provocative and rejected
@drjacekdebiec.bsky.socialReposted by @ploederl.bsky.social“The main argument for using antidepressants in children is that they are better than nothing. The evidence shows otherwise”.
@ploederl.bsky.socialThank you, Jacek! 🙏
@ploederl.bsky.socialThanks, Erick!
@floriannaudet.bsky.socialReposted by @ploederl.bsky.social🔥 OUR STUDY FEATURED IN NATURE NEWS What if one flawed zombie trial 🧟 helped shape the evidence for treating depression in children? Quote : "Elia Abi-Jaoude, [...] calls the paper a “slam-dunk study”. “I hope it will get wide exposure” he says."
@ploederl.bsky.socialOur new paper is also feated in Nature news:
www.nature.com/articles/d41...
@ploederl.bsky.socialThanks for covering this so decently!
@richvn.bsky.socialReposted by @ploederl.bsky.social@floriannaudet.bsky.social, @ploederl.bsky.social and others found the change comes down to whether the meta-analyses happend to include a particular clinical trial on 40 children in Iran from 2006.
This one trial found an unfeasibly huge advantage for Prozac over another antidepressant.
@ploederl.bsky.social36/ Instead, we believe that the corrected results of the NMAs need to be published, ideally in the journals where the NMAs appeared. This way guideline committees, clinicians, and patients have access to more reliable estimations of efficacy.
@ploederl.bsky.social35/ Second, even if the zombie trial is retracted/corrected, how will the impact of this study be known if the evidence syntheses in which it is included are unchanged?
