scholarly journals An Update to the Article “Efficacy and Side Effect Profile of Different Formulations of Metformin: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis”

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (11) ◽  
pp. 2813-2816
Author(s):  
Catherine Aiken ◽  
Jane Tarry-Adkins ◽  
Imogen Grant ◽  
Rebecca Reynolds ◽  
Susan Ozanne
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Side Effect Profile

scholarly journals Efficacy and Side Effect Profile of Different Formulations of Metformin: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane L. Tarry-Adkins ◽  
Imogen D. Grant ◽  
Susan E. Ozanne ◽  
Rebecca M. Reynolds ◽  
Catherine E. Aiken
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Side Effect Profile

scholarly journals A systematic review on clinical effectiveness, side-effect profile and meta-analysis on continuation rate of etonogestrel contraceptive implant

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kusum V. Moray ◽  
Himanshu Chaurasia ◽  
Oshima Sachin ◽  
Beena Joshi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Side Effect Profile ◽  
Continuation Rate ◽  
One Year ◽  
Copper Iud ◽  
Continuation Rates

Abstract Background Unintended pregnancies (UIP) have a significant impact on health of women and the health budget of countries. Contraception is an effective way to prevent UIPs. The study objective was to collate evidence on clinical effectiveness of etonogestrel subdermal implant (ESI), continuation rate and side effect profile among eligible women of reproductive age group, as compared to levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS), copper intrauterine device (Cu-IUD) and depot medroxy progesterone acetate injections; other types of contraceptive implants were excluded as comparators. Methods The protocol of the systematic review was registered in Prospero (registration number: CRD42018116580). MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane library and web of science were the electronic databases searched. A search strategy was formulated and studies from 1998 to 2019 were included. Clinical trial registries and grey literature search was done. Critical assessment of included studies was done using appropriate tools. A qualitative synthesis of included studies was done and a meta-analysis was conducted in RevMan software for continuation rates of ESI as compared to other long acting reversible contraceptives (LARC) e.g. LNG IUS and Cu-IUD. Results The search yielded 23,545 studies. After excluding 467 duplicates, 23,078 titles were screened and 51 studies were included for the review. Eight of the 15 studies reporting clinical effectiveness reported 100% effectiveness and overall pearl index ranged from 0 to 1.4. One-year continuation rates ranged from 57–97%; 44–95% at the end of second year and 25–78% by 3 years of use. Abnormal menstruation was the most commonly reported side effect. There was no significant difference in bone mineral density at 1 year follow-up. The meta-analyses showed that odds ratio (OR) of 1-year continuation rate was 1.55 (1.36, 1.76) for LNG-IUS vs. ESI and 1.34 (1.13, 1.58) for copper-IUD vs. ESI; showing that continuation rates at the end of one-year were higher in LNG-IUS and copper-IUD as compared to ESI. Conclusion ESI is clinically effective and safe contraceptive method to use, yet 1-year continuation rates are lower as compared to LNG-IUS and copper-IUD, mostly attributed to the disturbances in the menstruation.

Intranasal steroid sprays in the treatment of rhinitis: is one better than another?

2003 ◽  
Vol 117 (11) ◽  
pp. 843-845 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. N. Waddell ◽  
S. K. Patel ◽  
A. G. Toma ◽  
A. R. Maw
Keyword(s):  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Side Effect Profile ◽  
Daily Cost ◽  
Intranasal Corticosteroids ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Nasal Steroids ◽  
Intranasal Steroids ◽  
Better Than

The treatment of allergic rhinitis has been revolutionized by the introduction of topical nasal steroids, which are one of the commonest prescriptions from otolaryngology departments. With so many different sprays available on the market, the literature was reviewed for the efficacy, side-effect profile and relative cost of each product and the following conclusions made:(1) A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of intranasal corticosteroids and oral antihistamines in the treatment of allergic rhinitis showed a clear benefit in favour of intranasal steroids in relieving nasal symptoms.(2) There is no clear evidence to support the suggestion that one steroid spray is more effective than another in the treatment of seasonal or perennial allergic rhinitis.(3) All the sprays have a similar side-effect profile; the commonest being epistaxis with a reported incidence between 17 and 23 per cent. In all the clinical trials, the placebo spray had an appreciable rate of epistaxis of between 10 to 15 per cent.(4) Fluticasone causes a reduction in endogenous cortisol secretion but no significant adrenal suppression was seen with triamcinolone, beclomethasone, budesonide or mometasone.(5) There is little evidence that skeletal growth is restricted by the administration of topical nasal steroid sprays.(6) There is considerable variation in the daily cost of each spray. Beclomethasone, dexamethasone and budesonide are significantly cheaper than fluticasone, mometasone or triamcinolone.

Efficacy, tolerability and side-effect profile of fluvoxamine for major depression: meta-analysis

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 539-550 ◽  
Author(s):  
IM Omori ◽  
N Watanabe ◽  
A Nakagawa ◽  
T Akechi ◽  
A Cipriani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Major Depression ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Side Effect Profile

scholarly journals Comparative efficacy and side-effect profile of ketamine and esketamine in the treatment of unipolar and bipolar depression: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e043457
Author(s):  
Zhiqing Zhan ◽  
Xichao Wang ◽  
Qing Chen ◽  
Zhidai Xiao ◽  
Bin Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Side Effect ◽  
Web Application ◽  
Bipolar Depression ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Antidepressant Drugs ◽  
Side Effect Profile ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Reference Selection

IntroductionDespite a range of antidepressant drugs and therapies, approximately one-third of patients fail to achieve meaningful recovery, prompting the urgent need for more effective treatment for depression. Several open-label studies randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses have been conducted to confirm the therapeutic efficacy and side effects of ketamine and esketamine. Esketamine is (S)- enantiomer of ketamine; however, there is limited evidence comparing esketamine and ketamine in treating unipolar and bipolar depression have been published so far.Methods and analysisWe will include all double-blind RCTs comparing efficacy and side-effect profile of ketamine and esketamine in the treatment of unipolar and bipolar depression. Our primary outcomes will be study-defined response at endpoint assessment; dropouts due to adverse events and other adverse drug reactions. Published studies will be retrieved through relevant database searches. Reference selection and data extraction will be independently completed by two investigators, resolving inconsistencies by consensus or a discussion with the third investigator. For each outcome, we will undertake a network meta-analysis to synthesise all evidence. Local and global methods will be used to evaluate consistency. We will assess the quality of evidence contributing to network estimates with the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis web application.Ethics and disseminationThis work does not require ethics approval as it will be based on published studies. This review will be published in peer-reviewed journals.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020201559.

scholarly journals Treatment Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation to Peripartum Depression: Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyunejune Lee ◽  
Sungmin Kim ◽  
Ji Yean Kwon
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Chemical Effect ◽  
Attractive Alternative ◽  
Life Threatening ◽  
Peripartum Depression

Abstract BackgroundPeripartum depression is a common disorder; it has very high potential hazards for both patients and their babies. Although peripartum depression therapy have typical options, antidepressant and electroconvulsive, these are not ensured concerning safe of fetus. Recently, repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation(rTMS) have been emerging as promising treatment for neuropathies including type of depression. Using magnetic field is expected to minimize effect on fetuses when used to treat peripartum depression. In this study, we are considering that whether the rTMS treatment is safe and effective for the mother and fetus in the treatment of peripartum depression.PurposePerforming systematical review, we confirm whether repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation is suitable treatment option for peripartum depression. MethodsA systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines and meta-analysis was performed by CMA3 software. We investigated literature prior to July 2020 using databases including MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE and Cochrane libraries, and conducted bias evaluation for suitable literature. ResultsrTMS have an effect on mitigating depression with SMD = 1.394, 95% CI: 0.944 – 1.843 and. 37% of participants showed remission of the depression and 66% showed responded to repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. A few side effect was reported and case of unusual side effect was two. However, we confirmed these are not related to TMS. There were no life-threatening side effects.ConclusionsrTMS might be an attractive alternative treatment for pregnant women who are afraid of chemical effect to their child and life threatening side effect of ECT. Furthermore, rTMS could reduce socioeconomic costs of peripartum depression However, much research is needed to determine standardized protocol and evaluate effectiveness.Systematic review registrationThis systematic review was not registered.

scholarly journals Headache in ADHD as comorbidity and a side effect of medications: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Pei-Yin Pan ◽  
Ulf Jonsson ◽  
Sabriye Selin Şahpazoğlu Çakmak ◽  
Alexander Häge ◽  
Sarah Hohmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Children With Adhd ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Adhd Medications

Abstract There is mixed evidence on the association between headache and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), as well as headache and ADHD medications. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the co-occurrence of headache in children with ADHD, and the effects of ADHD medications on headache. Embase, Medline and PsycInfo were searched for population-based and clinical studies comparing the prevalence of headache in ADHD and controls through January 26, 2021. In addition, we updated the search of a previous systematic review and network meta-analysis of double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on ADHD medications on June 16, 2020. Trials of amphetamines, atomoxetine, bupropion, clonidine, guanfacine, methylphenidate, and modafinil with a placebo arm and reporting data on headache as an adverse event, were included. Thirteen epidemiological studies and 58 clinical trials were eligible for inclusion. In epidemiological studies, a significant association between headache and ADHD was found [odds ratio (OR) = 2.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.63–2.46], which remained significant when limited to studies reporting ORs adjusted for possible confounders. The pooled prevalence of headaches in children with ADHD was 26.6%. In RCTs, three ADHD medications were associated with increased headache during treatment periods, compared to placebo: atomoxetine (OR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.06–1.56), guanfacine (OR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.12–1.82), and methylphenidate (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.09–1.63). The summarized evidence suggests that headache is common in children with ADHD, both as part of the clinical presentation as such and as a side effect of some standard medications. Monitoring and clinical management strategies of headache in ADHD, in general, and during pharmacological treatment are recommended.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document