Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25981231›Full record

SynthesisNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2015

Levodopa alone compared with levodopa-sparing therapy as initial treatment for Parkinson's disease: a meta-analysis.

Cheng-long Xie, Yun-Yun Zhang, Xiao-Dan Wang, Jie Chen, Yi-He Chen, Jia-Lin Pa, Shi-Yi Lin, Hua-Zhen Lin, Wen-Wen Wang

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Levodopa-induced dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease: still no proof? A meta-analysis.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2018
    Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Cheng-long XieThe Center of Traditional Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital and Yuying Children's Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, 325027, China.
Yun-Yun Zhang
Xiao-Dan Wang
Jie Chen
Yi-He Chen
Jia-Lin Pa
Shi-Yi Lin
Hua-Zhen Lin
Wen-Wen Wang
Wenzhou Medical University · CNSecond Affiliated Hospital & Yuying Children's Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University · CNRuijin Hospital · CNZhejiang University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To assess the long-term use of L-dopa alone vs L-dopa-sparing therapy, as initial treatment, provides the most efficient long-term control of symptoms and best quality of life for people with early Parkinson's disease (PD). PubMed; Google scholar; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Web of Science were searched for randomised, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) on L-dopa alone and L-dopa sparing as initial treatment in early PD patients. We used a random effects model rather than a fixed effects model because of this takes into account heterogeneity between multi-studies. Eleven RCTs were included. The results showed that L-dopa alone could evidently improve the UPDRS part I (p = 0.005), part II (p < 0.0001), part III (p < 0.0001) and UPDRS total score (p = 0.004) compared with L-dopa-sparing therapy in PD patients. Meanwhile, a reduced risk of dyskinesia (p < 0.0001, RR = 1.88, 95 % CI 1. 37-2.59) and wearing-off phenomenon (p < 0.00001, RR = 1.36, 95 % CI 1. 20-1.55) in patients treated initially with L-dopa-sparing therapy compared to L-dopa has been consistently reported. What is more, we found more patients on aL-dopa-sparing therapy were more than triple as likely to discontinue treatment prematurely due to adverse events than L-dopa treatment patients (43.7 vs 15.8 %). L-Dopa alone is the most effective medication available for treating the motor symptoms of PD patients, despite the greater incidence of involuntary movements. Meanwhile, more patients on dopamine agonists or MAOBI were more likely to discontinue treatment prematurely than L-dopa alone treatment patients within the long follow-up period.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntiparkinson AgentsChemotherapy, AdjuvantDatabases, BibliographicHumansLevodopaMonoamine Oxidase InhibitorsOrgan Sparing TreatmentsParkinson DiseaseRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntiparkinson AgentsLevodopaMonoamine Oxidase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID25981231
OpenAlexW1902283971

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.