Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22335858›Full record

SynthesisBMC medicine2012

Is the efficacy of psychopharmacological drugs comparable to the efficacy of general medicine medication?

Florian Seemüller, Hans-Jürgen Möller, Sandra Dittmann, Richard Musil

Abstract readComparative StudySystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pathway and network embedding methods for prioritizing psychiatric drugs.Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing · 2020
    Article
  3. Article
  4. CAM in Psychiatry.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2013
    Article
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

4 authors.

Florian SeemüllerLudwig-Maximilian-University of Munich, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Nussbaumstr,7, 80336 Munich, Germany. fseemuel@med.lmu.de
Hans-Jürgen Möller
Sandra Dittmann
Richard Musil

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is an ongoing debate concerning the risk benefit ratio of psychopharmacologic compounds. With respect to the benefit, recent reports and meta-analyses note only small effect sizes with comparably high placebo response rates in the psychiatric field. These reports together with others lead to a wider, general critique on psychotropic drugs in the scientific community and in the lay press. In a recently published article, Leucht and his colleagues compare the efficacy of psychotropic drugs with the efficacy of common general medicine drugs in different indications according to results from reviewed meta-analyses. The authors conclude that, overall, the psychiatric drugs were generally not less effective than most other medical drugs. This article will highlight some of the results of this systematic review and discuss the limitations and the impact of this important approach on the above mentioned debate.

Indexed as

Drug PrescriptionsGeneral PracticeHumansPsychotropic DrugsTreatment OutcomePsychotropic Drugs

Identifiers

PMID22335858
PMCPMC3308206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.