Compound Profile
Escitalopram
Compound profile with evidence, safety, and practical fit.
Safety context — U. Details
At a glance
From this profile's structured data- Evidence
- Grade C
- Safety
- U.
- Profile context
- serotonin transporter (SERT), serotonergic signaling
Quick stats
- Evidence level
- Limited evidence
- Typical onset
- Varies by prep
- Safety rating
- Safety context: Use caution
- Best for
- Serotonin Transporter (SERT), Serotonergic Signaling
Botanical Context
Source botanicals and comparison guides related to Escitalopram.
Safety
Safety & Cautions
U. S.
High caution
Caution level: High. Multiple caution categories apply, or the record uses avoid/contraindication language.
- Interaction-AwareMedication or interaction context is explicitly noted.
- Anticoagulant CautionBleeding or anticoagulant-adjacent caution language is present.
Evidence Summary
Profile-wide ·C LimitedEvidence lens
Read as directional context, not settled clinical proof.
Human clinical evidence: Present in source signals
Mechanistic / preclinical: Mechanism mapped
Research maturity: Emerging research — main contexts: Serotonin Transporter (SERT) · Serotonergic Signaling
Safety boundary: Safety note available — U.
Confidence estimate based on the design quality and consistency of published clinical trials.
Escitalopram has a limited evidence rating.
Grade C: Limited Evidence
Evaluation of methodological rigor, population reach, and evidence alignment.
- Design Match
- Meta analysis
- Risk of Bias
- Low
- Consistency
- Consistent
How evidence grades work
Each grade reflects the strength and consistency of published human evidence — not marketing claims. Grades are based on study count, design quality, effect size, consistency, and recency.
- Strong
- Multiple RCTs, consistent direction, adequate effect size
- Moderate
- Some RCTs or consistent observational data in humans
- Preliminary / Mixed
- Animal or in-vitro only, or conflicting human data
- Traditional / Theoretical
- Traditional use only; no controlled human trials
Clinical Study Summaries (4)3 human evidence sources · 2 human trials · Participant totals not consistently reported · Consistency not yet classifiable
Filter by study class
Showing 4 of 4 studies.
What the evidence actually shows
This table contains 4 structured sources, including 3 human evidence sources; 2 are human trials.
| Study | Design | N | Dose | Duration | Population | Outcome | Result & magnitude | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Background | Meta-analysis Statistically combines results from multiple eligible studies; confidence still depends on the quality, consistency, and directness of those studies. | — | — | — | — | — | A 2018 network meta-analysis of 522 randomized trials involving 116,477 adults found all 21 included antidepressants more efficacious than placebo for acute major depressive disorder; escitalopram was among the included treatments, with comparative efficacy and acceptability varying across head-to-head comparisons and evidence certainty ranging from moderate to very low. | PubMed → |
Background | Randomized controlled trial Randomly assigns participants to interventions or controls, reducing many sources of bias when the trial is conducted well. | — | — | — | — | — | A pooled analysis of three similarly designed eight-week randomized placebo-controlled trials involving approximately 850 adults with generalized anxiety disorder found greater improvement in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale scores with escitalopram than placebo. | PubMed → |
Background | Randomized controlled trial Randomly assigns participants to interventions or controls, reducing many sources of bias when the trial is conducted well. | — | — | — | — | — | Two randomized double-blind placebo-controlled studies comparing escitalopram with bupropion XL found treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction was more frequent with escitalopram than with bupropion XL or placebo among participants with normal sexual functioning at baseline. | PubMed → |
Background | Other / unclear The study design is not yet classified clearly enough to infer its place in the evidence hierarchy. | — | — | — | — | — | A 2026 U.S. DailyMed label for escitalopram tablets identifies escitalopram as an SSRI indicated for major depressive disorder in adults and pediatric patients 12 years and older and for generalized anxiety disorder in adults and pediatric patients 7 years and older, and carries a boxed warning regarding suicidal thoughts and behaviors in pediatric and young adult patients. | Source → |
Dosing
- No standardized dose
- No standardized dose is established for this ingredient in our source data. Preparations differ widely, so follow the standardization on the product you actually have and speak to a clinician before starting.
Compare & Sourcing
Compare side-by-side tradeoffs or verify active marker guidelines.
Review available sources for Escitalopram
Independent database mapping — evaluated separately from safety and efficacy scores.
Affiliate disclosure: Shopping links may earn this site a commission at no cost to you. Links are chosen on quality and availability, never commission tiers; safety warnings and evidence ratings stay independent.
Free safety checklist
Get the Escitalopram evidence notes
Occasional research updates, safety context, and product-quality checks for supplement decisions.
We use your email to send the checklist and occasional evidence-first supplement updates. Unsubscribe anytime. Privacy policy.
Safety first · Harm reduction
This information is educational and not medical advice. Start low, avoid risky combinations, and consult a licensed clinician before making health decisions—especially if you use medications, have diagnosed conditions, or are pregnant/breastfeeding.
Learn how we evaluate confidence, safety, and intensity on the methodology page.
Editorial Review
Checked against primary sources, cited evidence, and contraindication language before publication. Evidence claims, safety language, and affiliate modules are reviewed independently. Not personal medical advice.
Help improve this profile
Was this useful for your research?
These controls record only the page and the structured choice you make when analytics consent is enabled. Please don’t include personal medical information in research requests.
Was this evidence summary clear?
Did you find what you were researching?