Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26321114›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2015

Safety and efficacy of digoxin: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational and controlled trial data.

Oliver J Ziff, Deirdre A Lane, Monica Samra, Michael Griffith, Paulus Kirchhof, Gregory Y H Lip, Richard P Steeds, Jonathan Townend, Dipak Kotecha

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 114 papers, 19 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
114citing papers in PubMed, 19 pooled it
22.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

114 citing papers in PubMed, 19 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 333 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Guideline
  6. Guideline
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Is echocardiography valid and reproducible in patients with atrial fibrillation? A systematic review.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2017
    Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Trial

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Oliver J ZiffUniversity of Birmingham Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, Birmingham, UK Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Deirdre A LaneUniversity of Birmingham Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, Birmingham, UK Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, City Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
Monica SamraRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Michael GriffithUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Paulus KirchhofUniversity of Birmingham Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, Birmingham, UK Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, City Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
Gregory Y H LipUniversity of Birmingham Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, Birmingham, UK Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, City Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
Richard P SteedsUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Jonathan TownendUniversity of Birmingham Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, Birmingham, UK University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Dipak KotechaUniversity of Birmingham Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, Birmingham, UK Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trust, City Hospital, Birmingham, UK University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK Monash Centre of Cardiovascular Research and Education in Therapeutics, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia d.kotecha@bham.ac.uk.
University of Birmingham · GBUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust · GBRoyal Free London NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo clarify the impact of digoxin on death and clinical outcomes across all observational and randomised controlled trials, accounting for study designs and methods. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: Comprehensive literature search of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, reference lists, and ongoing studies according to a prospectively registered design ( PROSPERO: CRD42014010783), including all studies published from 1960 to July 2014 that examined treatment with digoxin compared with control (placebo or no treatment). DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Unadjusted and adjusted data pooled according to study design, analysis method, and risk of bias.

main outcome measuresPrimary outcome (all cause mortality) and secondary outcomes (including admission to hospital) were meta-analysed with random effects modelling.

results52 studies were systematically reviewed, comprising 621,845 patients. Digoxin users were 2.4 years older than control (weighted difference 95% confidence interval 1.3 to 3.6), with lower ejection fraction (33% v 42%), more diabetes, and greater use of diuretics and anti-arrhythmic drugs. Meta-analysis included 75 study analyses, with a combined total of 4,006,210 patient years of follow-up. Compared with control, the pooled risk ratio for death with digoxin was 1.76 in unadjusted analyses (1.57 to 1.97), 1.61 in adjusted analyses (1.31 to 1.97), 1.18 in propensity matched studies (1.09 to 1.26), and 0.99 in randomised controlled trials (0.93 to 1.05). Meta-regression confirmed that baseline differences between treatment groups had a significant impact on mortality associated with digoxin, including markers of heart failure severity such as use of diuretics (P=0.004). Studies with better methods and lower risk of bias were more likely to report a neutral association of digoxin with mortality (P<0.001). Across all study types, digoxin led to a small but significant reduction in all cause hospital admission (risk ratio 0.92, 0.89 to 0.95; P<0.001; n=29,525).

conclusionsDigoxin is associated with a neutral effect on mortality in randomised trials and a lower rate of admissions to hospital across all study types. Regardless of statistical analysis, prescription biases limit the value of observational data.

Indexed as

Atrial FibrillationCardiotonic AgentsDigoxinHeart FailureHospitalizationHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareTreatment OutcomeCardiotonic AgentsDigoxin

Identifiers

PMID26321114
PMCPMC4553205
OpenAlexW2160601239

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.