Multiple news outlets reported one big story this week from a study in the New England Journal of Medicine. Oregon researchers found that studies given to the FDA that questioned the effectiveness of antidepressants had largely gone unpublished in reputable medical journals, which may have caused doctors to overestimate the drugs’ benefits and prescribe them unnecessarily.

The Wall Street Journal reports that the FDA may not have the resources to publicize all the studies it receives.

Sharon Begley, a science writer for Newsweek, spells out the numbers at her Lab Notes blog:

In the published literature, 94 percent of the studies concluded that the antidepressant worked better than a sugar pill. In the FDA files, 51 percent of the studies were positive. Of 36 studies that were not positive, 33 either were not published or were spun in such a way as to seem positive.

Begley thinks doctors and patients aren’t the only ones who’ve been had: Journalists have, too. Since news coverage is often only as good as its sources, she urges “caveat emptor” (let the buyer beware):

So next time you read or hear a story in the media about the wonders of a new drug, stop a minute and ask which contrary evidence might be moldering in a file drawer somewhere.

That’s good advice for the future, but what about now? Should doctors still prescribe antidepressants at all?

The lead author of the study, Dr. Erick Turner, isn’t so sure. He told the Journal,

There is a view that these drugs are effective all the time. I would say they only work 40% to 50% of the time (based on his reviews of the research at the FDA) and they would say, ‘What are you talking about? I have never seen a negative study.’”

Of course, some depressed people - and their doctors - might be happy with a 40 to 50 percent chance of improvement. But the main point is that so much more seems to have been falsely promised but wasn’t delivered.

As we say in the news business, this story has legs. Stay tuned.