Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic resulted in a major increase in depression and anxiety disorders worldwide, which increased the demand for mental health services. However, clinical interventions for treating mental disorders are currently insufficient to meet this growing demand. There is an urgent need to conduct scientific and standardized clinical research that are consistent with the features of mental disorders in order to deliver more effective and safer therapies in the clinic. Our study aimed to expose the challenges, complexities of study design, ethical issues, sample selection, and efficacy evaluation in clinical research for mental disorders. The reliance on subjective symptom presentation and rating scales for diagnosing mental diseases was discovered, emphasizing the lack of clear biological standards, which hampers the construction of rigorous research criteria. We underlined the possibility of psychotherapy in efficacy evaluation alongside medication treatment, proposing for a multidisciplinary approach comprising psychiatrists, neuroscientists, and statisticians. To comprehend mental disorders progression, we recommend the development of artificial intelligence integrated evaluation tools, the use of precise biomarkers, and the strengthening of longitudinal designs. In addition, we advocate for international collaboration to diversity samples and increase the dependability of findings, with the goal of improving clinical research quality in mental disorders through sample representativeness, accurate medical history gathering, and adherence to ethical principles.
Chen et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: