A small retrospective study published on 14 September examined mental-health screening results in adolescents with obesity after initiation of GLP-1 receptor agonists. The authors found no increase in suicidality screening signals among the patients with paired data. In a smaller subgroup with matched depression questionnaires, median scores fell during follow-up. The result is useful as a narrowly defined clinical observation, but it is not a causal test and does not settle the broader safety question.
The study matters because psychiatric questions around GLP-1 receptor agonists are often discussed at a population level, while evidence from adolescents remains limited. The investigators worked from records at one academic paediatric endocrinology setting, not from a randomised trial. That design can identify patterns in documented care, but it cannot show that an observed change was caused by a medicine.
What the researchers reviewed
The team reviewed electronic health records for 44 patients aged 12 to 21 years treated with liraglutide or semaglutide between June 2022 and December 2024. All participants had obesity and were followed in the same paediatric endocrinology setting. The researchers extracted clinical and psychosocial data from the records and compared baseline assessments with later assessments only when the same screening instrument had been used at both time points.
That restriction is important. Depression was assessed with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, or PHQ-9, while suicidality was screened with the Ask Suicide-Screening Questions, or ASQ. A score from one instrument is not interchangeable with a score from the other, so the authors did not combine unlike measurements. Fifteen patients had paired PHQ-9 results and 23 had paired ASQ results.
In the PHQ-9 subgroup, the median score changed from 6 at baseline to 1 at follow-up. The authors report a paired-test p value of 0.003 and state that the change was independent of changes in body-mass index. In the ASQ subgroup, they report no new suicidal ideation and no rise in suicidality screening findings during the observed period.
What the result does and does not show
The paper’s conclusion is deliberately limited: the review found no evidence of short-term psychological harm or increased suicidality in this small sample. That wording is not the same as demonstrating that GLP-1 receptor agonists improve mental health, or that a risk is absent in every setting. A retrospective review has no untreated comparison group, and the patients’ mental-health scores can be influenced by counselling, family circumstances, other care, changing school conditions and many other factors that record data may not capture completely.
The PHQ-9 result also comes from only 15 paired records. A statistically significant within-group change can be a valuable prompt for further research, but the small number means the estimate is not a precise population-wide answer. The ASQ finding is similarly reassuring only within the bounds of the measured follow-up and the screened group. The authors call for larger prospective case-control studies, an appropriate next step for separating temporal association from causation.
Why adolescent evidence needs its own context
Adolescence is not simply a smaller version of adulthood in clinical research. Developmental stage, access to specialist care, family support and the way symptoms are recorded can all affect both follow-up and measured outcomes. That is why adult datasets, adverse-event reports and trial populations cannot be assumed to answer a paediatric question directly.
For context, a large randomised trial of weekly semaglutide in adolescents with obesity evaluated weight-related outcomes, but it was not designed to establish a broad psychiatric-safety conclusion. The new record review looks at a different question: whether routinely collected screening results changed in one real-world paediatric service. These approaches are complementary, yet neither replaces careful study designs with adequate sample size and prospective follow-up.
The study also does not provide a basis for personal treatment decisions or for use of research material outside a controlled protocol. Peptra Labs material is discussed within a Research Use Only boundary. The related Research Use Only (RUO) term describes that distinction between laboratory research and clinical care.
Where it fits in incretin research
GLP-1 receptor agonists are a broad pharmacological category, so results from one compound, age group or clinical environment should not be transferred automatically to another. Likewise, other incretin-related research compounds have distinct receptor profiles and evidence bases. Retatrutide is a separate research compound, and its background belongs in the Retatrutide research reference hub, rather than being inferred from this adolescent chart review.
Readers comparing scientific background materials can also use the site’s research-peptide guide index and Best Research Peptides 2026. Those pages are context resources, not evidence that the present study tested or endorsed any research product.
The central takeaway is proportionate: among 44 adolescents whose records were reviewed, the authors did not observe a short-term suicidality signal in the paired screening data. The finding is worth following, especially because direct adolescent data are scarce. Its size, single-centre design and retrospective nature mean that it should be read as an early clinical observation, not as a final answer about psychiatric safety.
References
- Said J, Liegl M, Pan AY, Dabrowski E. GLP-1 receptor agonist use and mental health outcomes in adolescents with obesity: a retrospective review. Journal of Pediatric Endocrinology and Metabolism. 2026. PubMed
- Weghuber D, Barrett T, Barrientos-Perez M, et al. Once-weekly semaglutide in adolescents with obesity. New England Journal of Medicine. 2022. Article
- U.S. National Library of Medicine. Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). NLM resource
The products referenced on this site are supplied for laboratory research use only. They are not medicines and are not intended for human or veterinary use. This article summarises published research for informational purposes and is not medical advice. Statements about third-party studies belong to their authors.
