Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17549446›Full record

SynthesisDer Nervenarzt2007

[Problems of evidence-based medicine in psychopharmacotherapy: problems of evidence grading and of the evidence basis for complex clinical decision making].

H-J Möller, W Maier

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. [Core symptoms of depression].Der Nervenarzt · 2009
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Do effectiveness ("real world") studies on antipsychotics tell us the real truth?European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2008
    Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

H-J MöllerKlinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Nussbaumstrasse 7, 80336, München. hans-juergen.moeller@med.uni-muenchen.de
W Maier

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Meta-Analysis as TopicClinical Trials as TopicDecision Support Systems, ClinicalEvidence-Based MedicineGermanyPsychopharmacology

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.