scholarly journals Second-generation antipsychotic drugs and short-term mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (8) ◽  
pp. 653-663 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Schneider-Thoma ◽  
Orestis Efthimiou ◽  
Maximilian Huhn ◽  
Marc Krause ◽  
Leonie Reichelt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Antipsychotic Drugs ◽  
Second Generation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Short Term Mortality ◽  
Second Generation Antipsychotic ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Davide Papola ◽  
Giovanni Ostuzzi ◽  
Federico Tedeschi ◽  
Chiara Gastaldon ◽  
Marianna Purgato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Panic Disorder ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Psychodynamic Therapy ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
First Line ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background Psychotherapies are the treatment of choice for panic disorder, but which should be considered as first-line treatment is yet to be substantiated by evidence. Aims To examine the most effective and accepted psychotherapy for the acute phase of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia via a network meta-analysis. Method We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the most effective and accepted psychotherapy for the acute phase of panic disorder. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CENTRAL, from inception to 1 Jan 2021 for RCTs. Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines were used. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). The protocol was published in a peer-reviewed journal and in PROSPERO (CRD42020206258). Results We included 136 RCTs in the systematic review. Taking into consideration efficacy (7352 participants), acceptability (6862 participants) and the CINeMA confidence in evidence appraisal, the best interventions in comparison with treatment as usual (TAU) were cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) (for efficacy: standardised mean differences s.m.d. = −0.67, 95% CI −0.95 to −0.39; CINeMA: moderate; for acceptability: relative risk RR = 1.21, 95% CI −0.94 to 1.56; CINeMA: moderate) and short-term psychodynamic therapy (for efficacy: s.m.d. = −0.61, 95% CI −1.15 to −0.07; CINeMA: low; for acceptability: RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.54–1.54; CINeMA: moderate). After removing RCTs at high risk of bias only CBT remained more efficacious than TAU. Conclusions CBT and short-term psychodynamic therapy are reasonable first-line choices. Studies with high risk of bias tend to inflate the overall efficacy of treatments. Results from this systematic review and network meta-analysis should inform clinicians and guidelines.

scholarly journals Second-generation antipsychotic drugs and short-term somatic serious adverse events: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (9) ◽  
pp. 753-765 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Schneider-Thoma ◽  
Orestis Efthimiou ◽  
Irene Bighelli ◽  
Carola Dörries ◽  
Maximilian Huhn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Antipsychotic Drugs ◽  
Second Generation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Second Generation Antipsychotic

scholarly journals Endovenous ablation and surgery in great saphenous vein reflux: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e024813 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boonying Siribumrungwong ◽  
Kanoklada Srikuea ◽  
Saritphat Orrapin ◽  
Thoetphum Benyakorn ◽  
Kittipan Rerkasem ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Great Saphenous Vein ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Effect Model ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Anatomical Success ◽  
Vein Reflux

IntroductionEndovenous ablations are the new standard procedures for treatment of great saphenous vein reflux including endovenous laser ablation (EVLA), radio frequency ablation (RFA), endovenous steam ablation (EVSA), mechanochemical ablation (MOCA), cyanoacrylate injection and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS). EVLA and RFA have demonstrated similar anatomical success for short-term outcome, but results are controversial for longer term (≥5 years). Additional evidences from randomised controlled trials have been published. This study is, therefore, conducted to, directly and indirectly, compare outcomes among all procedures stratifying by short-term and long-term follow-up.Methods and analysisMedline and Scopus will be searched from 2000 to September 2018 with predefined search strategy. Interventions of interest are open surgery (ie, saphenofemoral or high ligation (HL) with stripping) and endovenous ablations (ie, EVLA, RFA, EVSA, MOCA, cyanoacrylate injection and UGFS). The primary outcome is anatomical success. Two independent reviewers will select studies, extract data and assess risk of bias. Disagreement will be adjudicated by the third party. Outcomes will be directly pooled if there are at least three studies in that comparison. A fixed-effect model will be used unless heterogeneity is present, in which case a random-effect model will be applied. Sources of heterogeneity will be explored using meta-regression analysis, and sub-group analysis will be done accordingly. Publication bias will be assessed using Egger’s test and funnel plot. A network meta-analysis will be applied to indirect compare all interventions including RFA, EVLA, EVLA with HL, UGFS, UGFS with HL and HL with stripping. Probability of being best intervention will be estimated and ranked. Inconsistency assumption will be checked using a design-by-treatment interaction model.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for systematic review and network meta-analysis. The study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018096794.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document