Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19152203›Full record

SynthesisThe American journal of drug and alcohol abuse2009

A meta-analysis of retention in methadone maintenance by dose and dosing strategy.

Yan-Ping Bao, Zhi-Min Liu, David H Epstein, Cun Du, Jie Shi, Lin Lu

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The American journal of drug and alcohol abuse, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–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

77 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Yan-Ping BaoNational Institute on Drug Dependence, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Zhi-Min Liu
David H Epstein
Cun Du
Jie Shi
Lin Lu

Funding

Evaluation Of Treatments Of Opioid And Cocaine DependenceZIADA000175 · NIDA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE · PI PRESTON, KENZIE · 2009 to 2016
$7.4M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 DA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo estimate, via meta-analysis, the influence of different methadone dose ranges and dosing strategies on retention rates in methadone maintenance treatment (MMT).

methodsA systematic literature search identified 18 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating methadone dose and retention. Retention was defined as the percentage of patients remaining in treatment at a specified time point. After initial univariate analyses of retention by Pearson chi-squares, we used multilevel logistic regression to calculate summary odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals for the effects of methadone dose (above or below 60 mg/day), flexible vs. fixed dosing strategy, and duration of follow-up.

resultsThe total number of opioid-dependent participants in the 18 studies was 2831, with 1797 in MMT and 1034 receiving alternative mediations or placebo. Each variable significantly predicted retention with the other variables controlled for. Retention was greater with methadone doses > or = 60 than with doses < 60 (OR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.43-2.11). Similarly, retention was greater with flexible-dose strategies than with fixed-dose strategies (OR: 1.72, 95% CI: 1.41-2.11).

conclusionsHigher doses of methadone and individualization of doses are each independently associated with better retention in MMT.

Indexed as

Patient ComplianceDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansMethadoneOdds RatioRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRegression AnalysisSubstance-Related DisordersMethadone

Identifiers

PMID19152203
PMCPMC3689307

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.