ArticleEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2010
Evidence-based medicine in psychopharmacotherapy: possibilities, problems and limitations.
Article in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychiatric diagnosis and treatment in the 21st century: paradigm shifts versus incremental integration.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2022Article
- Interpreting meta-regression: application to recent controversies in antidepressants' efficacy.Statistics in medicine · 2013Article
- Ethics of clinical research with mentally ill persons.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2012Article
- Article
- How close is evidence to truth in evidence-based treatment of mental disorders?European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2012Article
- Critical trial-related criteria in acute schizophrenia studies.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2012Article
- Executive summary of the report by the WPA section on pharmacopsychiatry on general and comparative efficacy and effectiveness of antidepressants in the acute treatment of depressive disorders.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2012Article
- 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
- Effectiveness studies: advantages and disadvantages.Dialogues in clinical neuroscience · 2011Review
- Principle standards and problems regarding proof of efficacy in clinical psychopharmacology.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2010Article
- Meta-analyses: a method to maximise the evidence from clinical studies?European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2010Article
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 clinical treatment in medicine. In general this is a meaningful development, which principally will have a positive impact on routine health care in psychiatry. But several related problems should not be ignored. So far consensus on an internationally accepted evidence graduation could not be reached due to several difficulties related to this. For example, focussing on the results of meta-analyses instead of considering relevant single studies results in a decision-making logic which is in conflict with the rationale applied by drug authorities in the licensing process. Another example is the relevance of placebo-controlled trials: if randomized placebo-controlled phase-III studies are prioritized in the evidence grading, the evidence possibly deviates too far from the conditions of routine clinical care due to the special selection of patients in those studies. However, a grading primarily based on active comparator trials could lead to wrong conclusions about efficacy. This concerns especially the so-called "effectiveness" studies and other forms of phase-IV studies with their less restrictive methodological rigidity. 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 clinical experience and a consensus on clinical experience, traditions and belief systems than on results of efficacy oriented phase-III and effectiveness-oriented phase-IV clinical studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19838763What 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.