SynthesisCNS neuroscience & therapeutics2014
Long-acting versus standard non-ergot dopamine agonists in Parkinson's disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in CNS neuroscience & therapeutics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative efficacy and safety of six non-ergot dopamine-receptor agonists in early Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Pooled it
- The Comparative Efficacy of Non-ergot Dopamine Agonist and Potential Risk Factors for Motor Complications and Side Effects From NEDA Use in Early Parkinson's Disease: Evidence From Clinical Trials.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Pooled it
- Review
- Current Pharmaceutical Treatments and Alternative Therapies of Parkinson's Disease.Current neuropharmacology · 2016Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of long-acting versus standard non-ergot dopamine agonists (NEDAs) in Parkinson's disease (PD), we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). MATERIALS AND
methodsThe PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library databases, and Web of Knowledge were searched up to November 20th 2013. The pooled weighted mean differences (WMDs) and relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.
resultsEight large-scale RCTs, involving 2402 patients, were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with the standard NEDAs, long-acting NEDAs exhibited similar improvements in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale activities of daily living (ADL) score (WMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.50), motor score (WMD -0.35, 95% CI -1.60 to 0.90), and "off" time (WMD 0.18, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.50). No differences were found in overall withdrawals (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.32), withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.56), or the ten commonly reported adverse events between the two formulations.
conclusionsOur meta-analysis showed long-acting NEDAs were noninferior to standard NEDAs in efficacy, tolerability, and safety in the treatment of PD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.