🧵 New WP with @kaimiele.bsky.social. We document 2 unsettling patterns in mental health care: 1) despite universal coverage, few individuals with mental illness receive guideline-consistent treatment, and 2) the more severe the illness, the lower the treatment uptake & the longer the wait times. 1/n
05.02.2026 08:35 — 👍 65 🔁 28 💬 6 📌 6
Want to feel sad and hopeful at once? What´s needed beyond Open Science?
"All of the ingredients for low quality occurring at some non-negligible rate seem to already be in place"—the nicest way I've ever heard someone say a terrible true thing.
What a great pitch for forensic meta-science ✌️
"The rewards to 'discovering' a spectacular scientific finding [in psychology] are large; the rewards to debunking frauds or deflating exaggerated claims are small if not non-existent. If these are the rules of the game, we should not be surprised at the way the game is played."
15.01.2026 15:51 — 👍 41 🔁 14 💬 1 📌 1
Many innovations of psychotherapies are currently examined. See our overview in the last issue of World Psychiatry: (1) Digital interventions (2) Personalized treatments (3) New/ improved therapies (4) Dissemination
With @mathiasharrer.bsky.social @toshi-frkw.bsky.social
doi.org/10.1002/wps....
📽️ "Taboo topics we can no longer avoid: negligence, tampering, and fraud" / with Ian Hussey @ianhussey.mmmdata.io
youtu.be/sdRRafephyM?...
The event was organised by ReproducibiliTea UniBasel @swissrn.bsky.social
Depending on assumptions, 77–91% of people needing treatment lack access to insurance-funded psychotherapy.
Preprint: osf.io/preprints/ps...
OSF (data & code): osf.io/z9htq
We synthesize 35 years of estimates on psychotherapy treatment need (1990–2025), assess their quality, and compare them to current treatment capacity.
Across all scenarios, Austria’s publicly funded psychotherapy system meets far less than estimated need.
New preprint 📄
How many psychotherapists does Austria need?
This one is special to me beyond the topic: it’s an update of the very first paper I ever wrote, almost a decade ago.
And I’ve always wanted to open a paper with a joke — this time I finally did. Let’s see if it survives peer review.
After 5 years of data collection, our WARN-D machine learning competition to forecast depression onset is now LIVE! We hope many of you will participate—we have incredibly rich data.
If you share a single thing of my lab this year, please make it this competition.
eiko-fried.com/warn-d-machi...
I love that they kept the interviewers’ reaction to the sentence you quoted:
“Look at your face,” Mr. Zervas said. “You’re horrified.”
😂
Fifteen of those twenty years were spent writing unsuccessful grant applications.
26.12.2025 10:48 — 👍 132 🔁 35 💬 3 📌 0
"(...) observed changes in PHQ-9 scores over treatment weeks may, at least partly, reflect shifts in how participants engage with the scale rather than true changes in depressive symptomatology." link.springer.com/article/10.1...
14.12.2025 21:59 — 👍 4 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0
What are some articles, blogposts, essays, etc. that you still think about over a year later?
Here are a few of mine:
Yes, I am one of those horrible people who submit during the season. New preprint, 1st paper from my #ERCStG DECOMPOSE
www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1...
The goals of DECOMPOSE are break-down psychological interventions into components, integrate these in a taxonomy and evaluate incremental efficacy
I am seeing this paper cited everywhere, @sciencenews.bsky.social @naturenews.bsky.social conferences, soon policy papers
osf.io/5rf2m/
First, what is the method of this paper? Systematic review? Scoping review? Overview of reviews? Narrative review? Or none was adequate?
JBI, Cochrane and Campbell Collaboration are partnering to co-facilitate an initiative, Building a Global Evidence Synthesis Community. We are calling for expressions of interest to join us as we seize a once-in-a-generation opportunity for a global step change in #EvidenceSynthesis synthesis. 🧵1/
12.12.2024 08:42 — 👍 27 🔁 8 💬 2 📌 1
This is not a hypothetical question in my case, and I am only slightly embarrassed 😂
06.12.2024 08:46 — 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Figure 1 from BMJ Mental Health paper, showing AI generated images for different mental disorders.
Stigmatising and inaccurate portrayals of mental disorders:
Researchers asked generative AI models to depict different disorders.
Images reflected historical biases & pop-culture references rather than evidence-based clinical representation of these conditions
mentalhealth.bmj.com/content/27/1...
Thank you!
03.12.2024 20:12 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Starting my job search: I just finished my PhD in Clinical Psychology and am looking for opportunities to make an impact.
I have expertise in meta-analyses, advanced stats, psychometrics, R, and project management.
If you know of a position that might be a great fit, please feel free to reach out.
Do a DAG Before You Do a Specification Curve Analysis #CausalSky #Stats
replicationnetwork.com/2024/11/18/r... With an example of reducing >1,200 specifications to 6. Computational power should not replace theoretical thinking and model building. 1/
TIL blue zones of longevity are not real:
“Newman’s main argument is that a significant proportion of supposed centenarians may simply not exist. His research shows that around 1900, when the U.S. started to issue birth certificates, the number of centenarians aged 110 or older dropped sharply…”
2/ They even describe it on Pubpeer: “This symbolic document provides an examination of medical malpractice within the field of neurosurgery, utilizing fictional scenarios that draw inspiration from actual cases frequently encountered in this specialty.”
23.11.2024 11:04 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 01/ Put away your pitchforks—I actually enjoyed the paper. It’s a clever fable set in space, exploring “the various difficulties that impact surgical outcomes.” It creatively contrasts patient-centered, evidence-based medicine with current practices (and future ones on Saturn).
23.11.2024 11:04 — 👍 7 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
Ever since a reviewer took the time to feedback my R code, highlighted steps that were hard to follow, and reran my analyses on their computer, I do the same when reviewing.
In general: seeing the supplement as an integral part of the paper and not as an afterthought!
How to deal with conflicting claims from multiple meta-analyses on the same topic?
Especially regarding: publication bias, state-of-the-art methods—should we apply all or only some corrections?
And what evidential value do meta-analyses of only high-risk-of-bias studies hold?
Just wanted to let everyone know that the one and only Pim Cuijpers and Toshi Furukawa are now on Bluesky as well! :)
@pimcuijpers.bsky.social
@toshi-frkw.bsky.social
#PsychSciSky #psychiatry #statssky #psychsky
Updated -largely no exhaustive- list : go.bsky.app/R8RNJgc
Please reply to be added.
A largely non exhaustive pack for meta research and open science. Please circulate it ;)
go.bsky.app/R8RNJgc
Spoiler: Incredibly sad and weirdly funny:
“The optimistic point is, in the long arc of things, we’ll self-correct, even if we have no incentive to retract or take responsibility.”
“Do you believe that?” I asked.
“On my optimistic days, I believe it.”
“Is today an optimistic day?”
“Not really.”
