SynthesisDer Nervenarzt2007
[Problems of evidence-based medicine in psychopharmacotherapy: problems of evidence grading and of the evidence basis for complex clinical decision making].
Synthesis in Der Nervenarzt, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- General and comparative efficacy and effectiveness of antidepressants in the acute treatment of depressive disorders: a report by the WPA section of pharmacopsychiatry.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2011Article
- [Guideline compliance in the treatment of schizophrenic patients. Introduction of a computer-assisted treatment pathway].Der Nervenarzt · 2010Article
- [Core symptoms of depression].Der Nervenarzt · 2009Article
- [Core symptoms of depression. Effectiveness of antidepressant therapy].Der Nervenarzt · 2009Review
- Isn't the efficacy of antidepressants clinically relevant? A critical comment on the results of the metaanalysis by Kirsch et al. 2008.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2008Article
- [Conflict of interest declarations in scientific publications].Der Nervenarzt · 2008Article
- Do effectiveness ("real world") studies on antipsychotics tell us the real truth?European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2008Review
- [Meta-analyses. A tool for maximizing therapy study evidence?].Der Nervenarzt · 2007Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Psychopharmacotherapy should now be regulated in the sense of evidence based medicine, as is the case in other areas of therapeutic medicine. In general, this is a meaningful development which will have a positive impact on routine health care. However, related problems should not be ignored. One important problem is the different definition of degrees of evidence. If placebo-controlled studies are prioritized, evidence deviates too much from the conditions of routine clinical care. However, the restriction to active comparative trials could lead to false conclusions about efficacy. In addition, if the focus is placed on the results of meta-analyses instead of considering relevant single studies, the result is a decision making logic contrary to that of the licensing process.Due to inherent methodological problems of the meta-analytical approach, the narrative, systematic review should retain its traditional importance and be used to provide a complementary view. Attempts to regulate psychopharmacotherapy in the sense of evidence based medicine come closer to their limits the more complex the clinical situation and the respective decision making logic are. Even in times of evidence based medicine, a large part of complex clinical decision making in psychopharmacotherapy still relies more on a consensus about clinical experience and traditions than on relevant empirical databases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17549446What 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.