SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006
Piracetam for acute ischaemic stroke.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Piracetam for acute ischaemic stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Potential efficacy of early treatment of acute acoustic trauma with steroids and piracetam after gunshot noise.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2008Trial
- Polypharmacy in elderly hospitalised patients in Slovakia.Pharmacy world & science : PWS · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPiracetam has neuroprotective and antithrombotic effects which may help to reduce death and disability in people with acute stroke.
objectivesThe objective of this review was to assess the effects of piracetam in acute presumed ischaemic stroke. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched 20 June 2005). In addition, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2005), EMBASE (1980 to April 2005), and ISI Science Citation Index (1981 to April 2005). We also contacted the manufacturer of piracetam to identify further published and unpublished studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing piracetam with control, with at least mortality reported and entry to the trial within approximately 48 hours of stroke onset. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted data and assessed trial quality and this was checked by the other two authors. Study authors were contacted for missing information. MAIN
resultsThree trials involving 1002 people were included, with one trial contributing 93% of the data. Participants' ages ranged from 40 to 85, and both sexes were equally represented. Piracetam was associated with a statistically non-significant increase in death at one month (approximately 31% increase, 95% confidence interval 81% increase to 5% reduction). This trend was no longer apparent in the large trial after correction for imbalance in stroke severity. Limited data showed no difference between the treatment and control groups for functional outcome, dependency or proportion of patients dead or dependent. Adverse effects were not reported. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere is some suggestion (but no statistically significant result) of an unfavourable effect of piracetam on early death, but this may have been caused by baseline differences in stroke severity in the trials. There is not enough evidence to assess the effect of piracetam on dependency.
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.