Brief interventions can be efficacious in changing alcohol consumption and increasingly take advantage of the internet to reach high-risk populations such as students.

To evaluate the effectiveness of a brief online intervention, controlling for the possible effects of the research process.

A three-arm parallel groups design was used to explore the magnitude of the feedback and assessment component effects. The three groups were: alcohol assessment and feedback (group 1); alcohol assessment only without feedback (group 2); and no contact, and thus neither assessment nor feedback (group 3). Outcomes were evaluated after 3 months via an invitation to participate in a brief cross-sectional lifestyle survey. The study was undertaken in two universities randomising the email addresses of all 14910 students (the AMADEUS-1 study, trial registration: ISRCTN28328154).

Overall, 52% (n = 7809) of students completed follow-up, with small differences in attrition between the three groups. For each of the two primary outcomes, there was one statistically significant difference between groups, with group 1 having 3.7% fewer risky drinkers at follow-up than group 3 (P = 0.006) and group 2 scoring 0.16 points lower than group 3 on the three alcohol consumption questions from the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C) (P = 0.039).

This study provides some evidence of population-level benefit attained through intervening with individual students.

Despite evidence of the effectiveness of injectable opioid treatment compared with oral methadone for chronic heroin addiction, the additional cost of injectable treatment is considerable, and cost-effectiveness uncertain.

To compare the cost-effectiveness of supervised injectable heroin and injectable methadone with optimised oral methadone for chronic refractory heroin addiction.

Multisite, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Outcomes were assessed in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Economic perspective included health, social services and criminal justice resources.

Intervention costs over 26 weeks were significantly higher for injectable heroin (mean £8995 v. £4674 injectable methadone and £2596 oral methadone; P<0.0001). Costs overall were highest for oral methadone (mean £15805 v. £13410 injectable heroin and £10945 injectable methadone; P =n.s.) due to higher costs of criminal activity. In cost-effectiveness analysis, oral methadone was dominated by injectable heroin and injectable methadone (more expensive and less effective). At willingness to pay of £30 000 per QALY, there is a higher probability of injectable methadone being more cost-effective (80%) than injectable heroin.

Injectable opioid treatments are more cost-effective than optimised oral methadone for chronic refractory heroin addiction. The choice between supervised injectable heroin and injectable methadone is less clear. There is currently evidence to suggest superior effectiveness of injectable heroin but at a cost that policy makers may find unacceptable. Future research should consider the use of decision analytic techniques to model expected costs and benefits of the treatments over the longer term.

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, and it has been suggested that combined bipolar disorder and ADHD is aetiologically distinct from the pure disorders.

To clarify whether ADHD shares genetic and environmental factors with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.

By linking longitudinal Swedish national registers, we identified 61 187 persons with ADHD (the proband group) and their first- and second-degree relatives, and matched them with a control group of people without ADHD and their corresponding relatives. Conditional logistic regression was used to determine the risks of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia in the relatives of the two groups.

First-degree relatives of the ADHD proband group were at increased risk of both bipolar disorder (odds ratio (OR) = 1.84−2.54 for parents, offspring and full siblings) and schizophrenia (OR = 1.71−2.22 for parents, offspring and full siblings). The risks of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia among second-degree relatives were substantially lower than among full siblings.

These findings suggest that the co-occurrence of ADHD and bipolar disorder as well as ADHD and schizophrenia is due to shared genetic factors, rather than representing completely aetiologically distinct subsyndromes.

Depression is associated with increased risk of several general medical conditions, including diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The nature of the association is complex and may involve bidirectional causation or a common pathophysiology.

To determine whether young people without depression but at increased familial risk have altered metabolic and blood pressure markers relative to matched controls.

We studied young people (n = 85), who had a parent with depression but no personal history of depressive illness (FH+) and healthy controls (n = 69). Cardiovascular risk profile was assessed by a fasting blood sample to measure insulin, glucose, lipids and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (CRP) and blood pressure was measured centrally and peripherally. Arterial stiffness and waking cortisol concentration were also measured.

Compared with controls, the FH+ group demonstrated increased peripheral and central systolic blood pressure, increased arterial stiffness and diminished insulin sensitivity but they did not differ from controls in measures of lipids, CRP or waking cortisol.

Our data suggest that young people at increased familial risk of depression show evidence of altered cardiovascular risk profile in young adulthood even in the absence of depressive symptoms. It is possible therefore that vulnerability to conditions such as hypertension and diabetes may precede the onset of major depression and may share common risk factors.

A growing number of studies have investigated the efficacy of novel, adjunctive pharmacotherapies for treatment of cognitive deficits in schizophrenia with conflicting results.

To investigate the comparative efficacy of these agents on cognition and symptoms in schizophrenia, and to identify promising cognitive domains and candidate medications that can be incorporated in treatment trials combined with cognitive remediation to maximise treatment effects.

A total of 26 double-blind, placebo-controlled studies investigating medications targeted at cholinergic, glutamatergic or serotonergic receptor classes and with participants with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were identified.

Medications targeted at the cholinergic receptor class produced marginal improvements in verbal learning and memory (d = 0.23, P = 0.06), and donepezil, a specific type of cholinergic agonist, produced a moderate effect (d = 0.58) on spatial learning and memory. Cholinergic and glutamatergic agents produced moderate effect-size improvements on negative symptoms (d = 0.54 and d = 0.62 respectively), and small effect-size improvements on general symptoms (d = 0.46 and d = 0.41 respectively). Serotonergic agents produced small effect-size improvements in positive symptoms (d = 0.33).

Cholinergic medications produced marginal improvement in verbal learning and memory and moderate improvements on spatial learning and memory, although there was no evidence to support the use of glutamatergic or serotonergic medications as a stand-alone treatment for improving cognitive function. Cholinergic and glutamatergic agents improved negative and general symptoms, whereas serotenergic medications improved positive symptoms.

Previous research has shown that those employed in certain occupations, such as doctors and farmers, have an elevated risk of suicide, yet little research has sought to synthesise these findings across working-age populations.

To summarise published research in this area through systematic review and meta-analysis.

Random effects meta-analyses were used to calculate a pooled risk of suicide across occupational skill-level groups.

Thirty-four studies were included in the meta-analysis. Elementary professions (e.g. labourers and cleaners) were at elevated risk compared with the working-age population (rate ratio (RR) = 1.84, 95% CI 1.46–2.33), followed by machine operators and deck crew (RR = 1.78, 95% CI 1.22–2.60) and agricultural workers (RR = 1.64, 95% CI 1.19–2.28). Results suggested a stepwise gradient in risk, with the lowest skilled occupations being at greater risk of suicide than the highest skill-level group.

This is the first comprehensive meta-analytical review of suicide and occupation. There is a need for future studies to investigate explanations for the observed skill-level differences, particularly in people employed in lower skill-level groups.

None.

More people are presenting with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), frequently a precursor to dementia, but we do not know how to reduce deterioration.

To systematically review randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of any intervention for MCI on cognitive, neuropsychiatric, functional, global outcomes, life quality or incident dementia.

We reviewed 41 studies fitting predetermined criteria, assessed validity using a checklist, calculated standardised outcomes and prioritised primary outcome findings in placebo-controlled studies.

The strongest evidence was that cholinesterase inhibitors did not reduce incident dementia. Cognition improved in single trials of: a heterogeneous psychological group intervention over 6 months; piribedil, a dopamine agonist over 3 months; and donepezil over 48 weeks. Nicotine improved attention over 6 months. There was equivocal evidence that Huannao Yicong improved cognition and social functioning.

There was no replicated evidence that any intervention was effective. Cholinesterase inhibitors and rofecoxib are ineffective in preventing dementia. Further good-quality RCTs are needed and preliminary evidence suggests these should include trials of psychological group interventions and piribedil.

C.L. has received grant support (research or continuing medical education) from NIMH, NIA, Associated Jewish Federation of Baltimore, Weinberg Foundation, Forest, GlaxoSmithKline, Eisai, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Ortho-McNeil, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, National Football League (NFL), Elan, Functional Neuromodulation; and has been a consultant/advisor to AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Eisai, Novartis, Forest, Supernus, Adlyfe, Takeda, Wyeth, Lundbeck, Merz, Lilly, Pfizer, Genentech, Elan, NFL Players Association, NFL Benefits Office, Avanir, Zinfandel, Bristol-Myers Squibb; and received honorarium or travel support from Pfizer, Forest, GlaxoSmithKline, Health Monitor.

There is recent evidence of some degree of shared genetic susceptibility between adult schizophrenia and childhood attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) for rare chromosomal variants.

To determine whether there is overlap between common alleles conferring risk of schizophrenia in adults with those that do so for ADHD in children.

We used recently published Psychiatric Genome-wide Association Study (GWAS) Consortium (PGC) adult schizophrenia data to define alleles over-represented in people with schizophrenia and tested whether those alleles were more common in 727 children with ADHD than in 2067 controls.

Schizophrenia risk alleles discriminated ADHD cases from controls (P = 1.04 × 104, R2 = 0.45%); stronger discrimination was given by alleles that were risk alleles for both adult schizophrenia and adult bipolar disorder (also derived from a PGC data-set) (P = 9.98 ×10−6, R2 × 0.59%).

This increasing evidence for a small, but significant, shared genetic susceptibility between adult schizophrenia and childhood ADHD highlights the importance of research work across traditional diagnostic boundaries.

Agomelatine is a novel antidepressant drug with narrative, non-systematic reviews making claims of efficacy.

The present study systematically reviewed published and unpublished evidence of the acute and long-term efficacy and acceptability of agomelatine compared with placebo in the treatment of major depression.

Randomised controlled trials comparing agomelatine with placebo in the treatment of unipolar major depression were systematically reviewed. Primary outcomes were (a) Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) score at the end of treatment (short-term studies) and (b) number of relapses (long-term studies).

Meta-analyses included 10 acute-phase and 3 relapse prevention studies. Seven of the included studies were unpublished. Acute treatment with agomelatine was associated with a statistically significant superiority over placebo of −1.51 HRSD points (99% Cl −2.29 to −0.73, nine studies). Data extracted from three relapse prevention studies failed to show significant effects of agomelatine over placebo (relative risk 0.78, 99% Cl 0.41−1.48). Secondary efficacy analyses showed a significant advantage of agomelatine over placebo in terms of response (with no effect for remission). None of the negative trials were published and conflicting results between published and unpublished studies were observed.

We found evidence suggesting that a clinically important difference between agomelatine and placebo in patients with unipolar major depression is unlikely. There was evidence of substantial publication bias.

Many mental health service users delay or avoid disclosing their condition to employers because of experience, or anticipation, of discrimination. However, non-disclosure precludes the ability to request ‘reasonable adjustments’. There have been no intervention studies to support decisionmaking about disclosure to an employer.

To determine whether the decision aid has an effect that is sustained beyond its immediate impact; to determine whether a large-scale trial is feasible; and to optimise the designs of a larger trial and of the decision aid.

In this exploratory randomised controlled trial (RCT) in London, participants were randomly assigned to use of a decision aid plus usual care or usual care alone. Follow-up was at 3 months. Primary outcomes were: (a) stage of decision-making; (b) decisional conflict; and (c) employment-related outcomes (trial registration number: NCT01379014).

We recruited 80 participants and interventions were completed for 36 out of 40 in the intervention group; in total 71 participants were followed up. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that reduction in decisional conflict was significantly greater in the intervention group than among controls (mean improvement −22.7 (s.d. = 15.2) v. −11.2 (s.d. = 18.1), P = 0.005). More of the intervention group than controls were in full-time employment at follow-up (P = 0.03).

The observed reduction in decisional conflict regarding disclosure has a number of potential benefits which next need to be tested in a definitive trial.