Cited by 13Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchTreatment of Major DepressionPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 20 of the 32 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Association between first-line antidepressant use and risk of dementia in older adults: a retrospective cohort study

Open access

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Prior studies suggested that antidepressant use is associated with an increased risk of dementia compared to no use, which is subject to confounding by indication. We aimed to compare the dementia risk among older adults with depression receiving first-line antidepressants (i.e., SSRI/SNRI) versus psychotherapy, which is also considered the first-line therapy for depression. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted using the US Medical Expenditure Panel Survey from 2010 to 2019. We included adults aged ≥ 50 years diagnosed with depression who initiated SSRI/SNRI or psychotherapy. We excluded patients with a dementia diagnosis before the first record of SSRI/SNRI use or psychotherapy. The exposure was the patient’s receipt of SSRI/SNRI (identified from self-report questionnaires) or psychotherapy (identified from the Outpatient Visits or Office-Based Medical Provider Visits files). The outcome was a new diagnosis of dementia within 2 years (i.e., survey panel period) identified using ICD-9/ICD-10 codes from the Medical Conditions file. Using a multivariable logistic regression model, we reported adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We also conducted subgroup analyses by patient sex, age group, race/ethnicity, severity of depression, combined use of other non-SSRI/SNRI antidepressants, and presence of underlying cognitive impairment. Results: Among 2,710 eligible patients (mean age = 61 ± 8, female = 69%, White = 84%), 89% used SSRIs/SNRIs, and 11% received psychotherapy. The SSRI/SNRI users had a higher crude incidence of dementia than the psychotherapy group (16.4% vs. 11.8%), with an aOR of 1.36 (95% CI = 1.06–1.74). Subgroup analyses yielded similar findings as the main analyses, except no significant association for patients who were aged < 65 years (1.23, 95% CI = 0.93–1.62), male (1.34, 95% CI = 0.95–1.90), Black (0.76, 95% CI = 0.48–1.19), had a higher PHQ-2 (1.39, 95% CI = 0.90–2.15), and had underlying cognitive impairment (1.06, 95% CI = 0.80–1.42). Conclusions: Our findings suggested that older adults with depression receiving SSRIs/SNRIs were associated with an increased dementia risk compared to those receiving psychotherapy.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In this retrospective cohort of US adults aged ≥50 with depression, first-line SSRI/SNRI use was associated with higher 2-year dementia risk than psychotherapy. The adjusted odds ratio was 1.36 (95% CI 1.06–1.74), with no significant association in several subgroups.

Key findings

  • Among 2,710 eligible patients (mean age 61 ± 8; 69% female; 84% White), 89% used SSRIs/SNRIs and 11% received psychotherapy.
  • Crude dementia incidence within 2 years was 16.4% in SSRI/SNRI users vs 11.8% in the psychotherapy group; adjusted OR was 1.36 (95% CI 1.06–1.74), and the marginal effect was 31.0% (95% CI 6.6–55.3%).
  • Subgroup analyses were mostly consistent, but no significant association was found for patients aged <65 years (aOR 1.23, 95% CI 0.93–1.62), male (1.34, 0.95–1.90), Black (0.76, 0.48–1.19), PHQ-2 score 3–6 (1.39, 0.90–2.15), or underlying cognitive impairment (1.06, 0.80–1.42).
  • Sensitivity analyses yielded similar findings: aOR 1.27 (95% CI 1.18–1.37) with 1:1 propensity score matching and 1.12 (95% CI 1.05–1.20) when removing comedications from propensity score estimation.

Methods

  • Retrospective cohort using 2010–2019 US Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data; included adults aged ≥50 with depression diagnosed in round 1 or 2 who initiated SSRI/SNRI or psychotherapy, excluding concomitant use of both, missing cognitive impairment data, and dementia before the index round.
  • Exposure was SSRI/SNRI use from prescribed medicines questionnaires vs psychotherapy from outpatient/office-based visit files; outcome was new dementia within the 2-year survey panel identified by ICD-9/ICD-10 codes from the Medical Conditions file.
  • Analysis used multiple imputation, propensity score trimming, stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting, and survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression with a doubly robust approach; subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also performed.

Limitations

  • The paper states MEPS follows patients for at most 2 years, which may underestimate dementia risk; lack of washout period prevented identifying incident new users and addressing depletion of susceptibles; duration of depression, death as a competing risk, and SSRI/SNRI dose and duration were unavailable.
  • The paper also notes small sample sizes after stratification as a possible reason for null subgroup findings.
  • Evident from the text: this is an observational study using self-reported medication data and administrative diagnosis codes, so residual confounding and exposure/outcome misclassification remain possible.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12877-023-04475-z

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

20 of 32 cited sources checked · 5 supported · 1 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 39 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 14
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 11
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 3
26 of 26
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    No unmeasured confounding remains after adjustment for measured covariates and propensity score methods.

    “we aimed to compare the risk of dementia among older adults using SSRIs/SNRIs (i.e., first-line pharmacological treatments) versus those on psychotherapy, adjusting for patients’ demographics, socioeconomic status, comorbidities, comedications, and most importantly, the severity of depression to minimize confounding by indication.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    MEPS data accurately capture SSRI/SNRI use and psychotherapy receipt.

    “We identified SSRI/SNRI use from the questionnaires in the prescribed medicines files using therapeutic classification variables from Cerner Multum, Inc. (Appendix Table 1). Psychotherapy used was identified from the Outpatient Visits or Office-Based Medical Provider Visits files.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The two-year survey panel period is sufficient to detect incident dementia associated with SSRI/SNRI use.

    “The outcome was a new diagnosis of dementia within 2 years (i.e., survey panel period) identified using ICD-9/ICD-10 codes from the Medical Conditions file.”
    “We followed up patients until the dementia outcome occurred or the end of each survey panel period (i.e., two years).”
3 of 3

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Cognitive-impairment missingness exclusion uses conflicting criteria

    Major

    The study design excludes patients whose cognitive-impairment data were missing at all rounds, whereas the selection figure says patients were excluded if the data were missing at any round. These are different eligibility criteria.

  • Reported absolute standardized mean differences include negative values

    Minor

    The paper defines ASMD as an absolute standardized mean difference, but Table 1 reports negative ASMD values. An absolute difference cannot be negative.

  • Results claim adjustment for a covariate excluded from analysis

    Minor

    The statistical analysis says insurance type was excluded because of missingness, but the main-results description lists insurance type among the adjusted confounders.

  • Cohort selection cannot yield a psychotherapy-only group

    Minor

    The selection figure says the 10,215 patients entering the subsequent exclusions all used an SSRI/SNRI. Because concomitant SSRI/SNRI and psychotherapy users were excluded, that pathway cannot yield the reported 308 patients receiving psychotherapy instead of an SSRI/SNRI.

4 of 4

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 38 references

2 of the 38 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Wedding D. In: Corsini RJ, editor. Current psychotherapies: Cengage Learning; 2013.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 13

Metadata

Authors
Wang, G. H.-M., Chen, W.-H., Chang, S.-H., Zhang, T., Shao, H., Guo, J., & Lo-Ciganic, W.-H.
Affiliations
  • University of Florida (US)
  • Emory University (US)
Venue
BMC Geriatrics
Published
2023-12-08
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
825-825
ISSN
1471-2318 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4389475855
Cited by
13
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4
FWCI
2.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Geriatrics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH121907)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA050676, R01DA044985)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Keywords
antidepressant use, dementia risk, older adults, depression, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, psychotherapy, confounding by indication, cognitive impairment, sex differences, racial and ethnic differences, depression severity, polypharmacy, antidepressant safety, Medicare claims data, PHQ-2

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-07, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-07 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review