ArticleJournal of neurology2005
The use of multiattribute decision models in evaluating triptan treatment options in migraine.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment and prioritization of the WHO "best buys" and other recommended interventions for the prevention and control of non-communicable diseases in Iran.BMC public health · 2020Article
- The use of multi-criteria decision making models in evaluating anesthesia method options in circumcision surgery.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2017Article
- Why pharmacokinetic differences among oral triptans have little clinical importance: a comment.The journal of headache and pain · 2011Review
- Patient satisfaction with eletriptan in the acute treatment of migraine in primary care.International journal of clinical practice · 2007Article
- Rizatriptan in the treatment of migraine.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe physician treating patients with migraine is now able to choose from among seven triptans-almotriptan, eletriptan, frovatriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan and zolmitriptan. These differ, to greater or lesser degrees, on a range of clinical attributes important for treatment selection.
objectiveTo outline the basic principles of Multiattribute Decision Making (MADM) and describe how one such method-TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution)-can be applied to evaluate the currently available triptans.
methodsIn an example application, summary data from a recent meta-analysis of 53 published and unpublished placebo-controlled trials of the oral triptans were combined in TOPSIS models with computer-generated attribute importance weights representing the entire range of possible values, That is, the relative performance of the triptans was explored across all logically possible combinations of relative importance of the treatment attributes available from the meta-analysis, and uncertainty was assessed based on the confidence intervals from the meta-analysis.
resultsWhen compared across the entire range of values for relative attribute importance, almotriptan, eletriptan and rizatriptan were more similar to a hypothetical ideal triptan and were more likely to appear in the top three closest to the hypothetical ideal, than were naratriptan, sumatriptan, and zolmitriptan.
conclusionUsing the TOPSIS model, almotriptan, eletriptan and rizatriptan were more likely to appear in the top three closest to the hypothetical ideal triptan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.