None.

R.P. and R.H. are atheists. C.C.H.C. is an ordained Anglican and a past Chair of the Royal College of Psychiatrists Spirituality and Psychiatry Special Interest Group. He writes here in a personal capacity.

J.C. has no financial interest in the use of, or reproduction of, the EPDS.

J.R.H., J.F.H. and D.T. are on the editorial board of the BJPsych. D.T. runs its social media arm.

None.

D.K.T. and S.S.S. are on the editorial board of the British Journal of Psychiatry and executives of the Academic Faculty at the Royal College of Psychiatrists. A.J.B.J., H.P. and Z.M. have roles at the Royal College of Psychiatrists that include evaluation of integrated care systems. A.J.B.J. is married to Dr Sarah Wollaston, Member of Parliament for Totnes and Chair of the Health Select Committee.

None.

None.

D.B.D is founding member of the Critical Psychiatry Network.

K.S.B. is Editor of the British Journal of Psychiatry.

Improvement in depression within the first 2 weeks of antidepressant treatment predicts good outcomes, but non-improvers can still respond or remit, whereas improvers often do not.

We aimed to investigate whether early improvement of individual depressive symptoms better predicts response or remission.

We obtained individual patient data of 30 trials comprising 2184 placebo-treated and 6058 antidepressant-treated participants. Primary outcome was week 6 response; secondary outcomes were week 6 remission and week 12 response and remission. We compared models that only included improvement in total score by week 2 (total improvement model) with models that also included improvement in individual symptoms.

For week 6 response, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and negative and positive predictive values of the total improvement model were 0.73, 0.67 and 0.74 compared with 0.77, 0.70 and 0.71 for the item improvement model. Model performance decreased for week 12 outcomes. Of predicted non-responders, 29% actually did respond by week 6 and 43% by week 12, which was decreased from the baseline (overall) probabilities of 51% by week 6 and 69% by week 12. In post hoc analyses with continuous rather than dichotomous early improvement, including individual items did not enhance model performance.

Examining individual symptoms adds little to the predictive ability of early improvement. Additionally, early non-improvement does not rule out response or remission, particularly after 12 rather than 6 weeks. Therefore, our findings suggest that routinely adapting pharmacological treatment because of limited early improvement would often be premature.

None.

None.

Preventing suicide and self-harm is a global health priority. Although there is a growing evidence base for the effectiveness of psychoanalytic and psychodynamic psychotherapies for a range of disorders, to date there has been no systematic review of its effectiveness in reducing suicidal and self-harming behaviours.

To systematically review randomised controlled trials of psychoanalytic and psychodynamic psychotherapies for suicidal attempts and self-harm.

We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Psycharticles, CINAHL, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomise controlled trials of psychoanalytic and psychodynamic psychotherapies for reducing suicide attempts and self-harm.

Twelve trials (17 articles) were included in the meta-analyses. Psychoanalytic and psychodynamic therapies were effective in reducing the number of patients attempting suicide (pooled odds ratio, 0.469; 95% CI 0.274–0.804). We found some evidence for significantly reduced repetition of self-harm at 6-month but not 12-month follow-up. Significant treatment effects were also found for improvements in psychosocial functioning and reduction in number of hospital admissions.

Psychoanalytic and psychodynamic psychotherapies are indicated to be effective in reducing suicidal behaviour and to have short-term effectiveness in reducing self-harm. They can also be beneficial in improving psychosocial well-being. However, the small number of trials and moderate quality of the evidence means further high-quality trials are needed to confirm our findings and to identity which specific components of the psychotherapies are effective.

None.

Self-harm is a major public health concern. Increasing ageing populations and high risk of suicide in later life highlight the importance of identification of the particular characteristics of self-harm in older adults.

To systematically review characteristics of self-harm in older adults.

A comprehensive search for primary studies on self-harm in older adults was conducted in e-databases (AgeLine, CINAHL, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Web of Science) from their inception to February 2018. Using predefined criteria, articles were independently screened and assessed for methodological quality. Data were synthesised following a narrative approach. A patient advisory group advised on the design, conduct and interpretation of findings.

A total of 40 articles (n = 62 755 older adults) were included. Yearly self-harm rates were 19 to 65 per 100 000 people. Self-poisoning was the most commonly reported method. Comorbid physical problems were common. Increased risk repetition was reported among older adults with self-harm history and previous and current psychiatric treatment. Loss of control, increased loneliness and perceived burdensome ageing were reported self-harm motivations.

Self-harm in older adults has distinct characteristics that should be explored to improve management and care. Although risk of further self-harm and suicide is high in all age cohorts, risk of suicide is higher in older adults. Given the frequent contact with health services, an opportunity exists for detection and prevention of self-harm and suicide in this population. These results are limited to research in hospital-based settings and community-based studies are needed to fully understand self-harm among older adults.

None.