Registry-Based Studies in Psychiatry: Advantages, Challenges, Applications, and Future Directions a Narrative Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54536/ajhp.v4i1.7574Keywords:
Epidemiology, Psychiatry, Real-World Evidence, Registry-Based Randomized Controlled Trials, Registry-Based StudiesAbstract
Psychiatric disorders contribute substantially to global morbidity and disability, while traditional randomized controlled trials (RCTs) often lack generalisability due to restrictive designs and limited follow-up. Registry-based studies have emerged as a complementary approach, leveraging real-world data to address these limitations.
To synthesise the conceptual foundations, methodological approaches, applications, advantages, challenges, and future directions of registry-based studies in psychiatry, and to evaluate their role alongside conventional RCTs.
A narrative (integrative) review was conducted following Sukhera (2022) guidelines. Literature from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar (1990–March 2026) was systematically searched using terms related to registry-based research and psychiatry. Key methodological and application-focused studies were selected through iterative screening and citation chaining.
Registry-based studies utilise routinely collected clinical and administrative data to enable large-scale, longitudinal, and population-level psychiatric research. They support diverse designs, including cohort studies, case-control analyses, and registry-based randomized controlled trials (rRCTs). Major advantages include high external validity, large sample sizes, cost-effectiveness, and long-term follow-up. Key challenges involve data quality, diagnostic validity, confounding, limited psychosocial variables, and ethical considerations. Applications span epidemiology, treatment outcomes, risk prediction, and health systems research.
Registry-based studies are a powerful complement to traditional RCTs, bridging the gap between controlled evidence and real-world psychiatric practice. Advances in digital health, artificial intelligence, and global registry infrastructure are expected to enhance their impact, particularly in advancing precision psychiatry and equitable mental health research.
References
World Health Organization. (2025). Over a billion people living with mental health conditions–services require urgent scale-up. WHO News Release, 2.
Fan, Y., Fan, A., Yang, Z., & Fan, D. (2025). Global burden of mental disorders in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2021: results from the global burden of disease study 2021. BMC psychiatry, 25(1), 486..
Mulder, R., Singh, A. B., Hamilton, A., Das, P., Outhred, T., Morris, G., ... & Malhi, G. S. (2018). The limitations of using randomised controlled trials as a basis for developing treatment guidelines. BMJ Ment Health, 21(1), 4-6.
Andrade, C. (2025). Poorly recognized and uncommonly acknowledged limitations of randomized controlled trials. Indian journal of psychological medicine, 47(1), 83-85.
Li, G., Sajobi, T. T., Menon, B. K., Korngut, L., Lowerison, M., James, M., ... & Thabane, L. (2016). Registry-based randomized controlled trials-what are the advantages, challenges, and areas for future research?. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 80, 16-24.
Munk-Jørgensen, P., & Dinesen Østergaard, S. (2011). Register-based studies of mental disorders. Scandinavian journal of public health, 39(7_suppl), 170-174.
Shiely, F., O Shea, N., Murphy, E., & Eustace, J. (2024). Registry-based randomised controlled trials: conduct, advantages and challenges—a systematic review. Trials, 25(1), 375.
Mors, O., Perto, G. P., & Mortensen, P. B. (2011). The Danish psychiatric central research register. Scandinavian journal of public health, 39(7_suppl), 54-57.
Ferrara, M., Gentili, E., Murri, M. B., Zese, R., Alberti, M., Franchini, G., ... & Grassi, L. (2023). Establishment of a Public Mental Health Database for Research Purposes in the Ferrara Province: Development and Preliminary Evaluation Study. JMIR Medical Informatics, 11(1), e45523.
Sukhera, J. (2022). Narrative reviews: flexible, rigorous, and practical. Journal of graduate medical education, 14(4), 414-417.
Mathes, T., & Pieper, D. (2018). Study design classification of registry-based studies in systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 93, 84-87.
Gliklich, R. E., Leavy, M. B., & Dreyer, N. A. (2020). Registry design. In Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User’s Guide [Internet]. 4th edition. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US).
Andrade, C. (2022). Research design: case-control studies. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 44(3), 307-309.
Rohde, C., Østergaard, S. D., & Jefsen, O. H. (2024). A nationwide target trial emulation assessing the risk of antidepressant-induced mania among patients with bipolar depression. American Journal of Psychiatry, 181(7), 630-638.
Jiang, H., Rehm, J., Tran, A., & Lange, S. (2024). Interrupted time series design and analyses in health policy assessment. Medrxiv.
Urban, L., Haller, N., Pieper, D., & Mathes, T. (2025). A methodological review identified several options for utilizing registries for randomized controlled trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 178, 111614.
Prakash, J., Ramakrishnan, T. S., Das, R. C., Srivastava, K., Mehta, S., & Shashikumar, R. (2014). Central registry in psychiatry: a structured review. Industrial Psychiatry Journal, 23(1), 10-14.
Doherty, D. A., Tong, S. Y., Reilly, J., Shrapnel, J., McDonald, S., Ahern, S., ... & Reid, C. M. (2023). Registry randomised trials: a methodological perspective. BMJ open, 13(3), e068057.
Beerten, S. G., De Pauw, R., Van Pottelbergh, G., Casas, L., & Vaes, B. (2024). Assessing mental health from registry data: What is the best proxy?. International journal of medical informatics, 183, 105340.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Alvin Joseph, Jessintha Petrus
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
