Kornør et al. [1] reviewed the results of studies comparing early trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (TFCBT) with supportive counselling (SC) in people identified as being at risk of developing traumatic stress related symptoms. They suggest that their results provide some evidence for the relative benefit of TFCBT in preventing chronic post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and related symptoms. We question the extent to which this conclusion applies to the subgroup of people who have experienced traumatic physical injuries. Our systematic review of the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for preventing the onset of disability in people who had experienced traumatic physical injuries emphasizes the equivocal nature of current research, notes some negative outcomes and cautions for very careful monitoring of such interventions should they be used. There is a need for further high quality research exploring the optimal timing and nature of such interventions, as well as who is most likely to benefit from them.

designed the review, supervised its conduct, performed reliability checks, identified additional papers, extracted data from primary sources, methodologically rated the studies and wrote the review. Gareth Owen wrote much of chapter 2 and was responsible for performing the searches and conducting the initial systematic review, identifying relevant papers, extracting information, quality assessing studies and summarising their findings. Matthew Hotopf and Swaran Singh contributed to the design of the review and commented on drafts. This work was undertaken by the Institute of Psychiatry who received funding from the Department of Health. This publication presents the findings from a systematic review of existing studies on Community Treatment Orders. The conclusions are based on a thorough analysis of this literature and do not necessarily express the views of the Department of Health.

While it is important for the evidence supporting practice guidelines to be current, that is often not the case. The advent of living systematic reviews has made the concept of "living guidelines" realistic, with the promise to provide timely, up-to-date and high-quality guidance to target users. We define living guidelines as an optimization of the guideline development process to allow updating individual recommendations as soon as new relevant evidence becomes available. A major implication of that definition is that the unit of update is the individual recommendation and not the whole guideline. We then discuss when living guidelines are appropriate, the workflows required to support them, the collaboration between living systematic reviews and living guideline teams, the thresholds for changing recommendations, and potential approaches to publication and dissemination. The success and sustainability of the concept of living guideline will depend on those of its major pillar, the living systematic review. We conclude that guideline developers should both experiment with and research the process of living guidelines.

Some statistically significant and possibly clinically meaningful differences between mirtazapine and other antidepressive agents were found for the acute-phase treatment of major depression. Mirtazapine is likely to have a faster onset of action than SSRIs during the acute-phase treatment. Dropouts occur similarly in participants treated with mirtazapine and those treated with other antidepressants, although the adverse event profile of mirtazapine is unique.