Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28756557›Full record

SynthesisClinical drug investigation2017

Effects of Central Nervous System Drugs on Recovery After Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

See-Hwee Yeo, Zheng-Jie Ian Lim, Jia Mao, Wai-Ping Yau

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical drug investigation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. FOCUS trial: results, potentialities and limits.Annals of translational medicine · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Serotonin Selective Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) and Stroke.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2018
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Pharmacokinetic Study of Piracetam in Focal Cerebral Ischemic Rats.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2018
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

See-Hwee YeoDepartment of Pharmacy, Faculty of Science, National University of Singapore, 18 Science Drive 4, Singapore, 117543, Singapore.
Zheng-Jie Ian LimDepartment of Pharmacy, Faculty of Science, National University of Singapore, 18 Science Drive 4, Singapore, 117543, Singapore.
Jia MaoDepartment of Pharmacy, Faculty of Science, National University of Singapore, 18 Science Drive 4, Singapore, 117543, Singapore.
Wai-Ping YauDepartment of Pharmacy, Faculty of Science, National University of Singapore, 18 Science Drive 4, Singapore, 117543, Singapore. phaywp@nus.edu.sg.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7852-9698
National University of Singapore · SG

Funding

National University of Singapore, Department of Pharmacy C-148-000-003-001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivePilot trials have suggested that pharmacotherapy may aid stroke recovery. The aim of this study was to systematically review the effects of antidepressants, anti-Alzheimer drugs, anti-Parkinson drugs, central nervous system (CNS) stimulants and piracetam on gross motor function, cognition, disability, dependency and quality of life (QOL) after stroke.

methodsPubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched, and 44 randomized controlled trials that compared outcomes of interest between drug treatment and placebo or no treatment were included. For each study, standardized mean difference (SMD) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Meta-analyses were conducted to pool results using either the fixed-effects or random-effects model.

resultsSelective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) improved gross motor function (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.22-0.85; three studies), disability (SMD 0.49, 95% CI 0.32-0.66; 14 studies) and QOL (MD 6.46, 95% CI 4.71-8.22; two studies), but there was insufficient evidence for their use in enhancing global cognition (SMD 0.23, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.46; five studies) and dependency (risk ratio 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.97; one fluoxetine study). In particular, gross motor function was improved by fluoxetine (SMD 0.64, 95% CI 0.31-0.98; two studies), while disability was improved by paroxetine (SMD 1.05, 95% CI 0.63-1.46; two studies), citalopram (SMD 0.51, 95% CI 0.08-0.93; two studies) and fluoxetine (SMD 0.41, 95% CI 0.22-0.60; nine studies). There is insufficient evidence for the use of anti-Alzheimer drugs, anti-Parkinson drugs, CNS stimulants and piracetam to promote stroke recovery.

conclusionsAdministration of SSRIs may improve gross motor function, reduce disability and enhance QOL for patients recovering from stroke.

Indexed as

Antidepressive AgentsCentral Nervous System AgentsCognitionHumansQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelective Serotonin Reuptake InhibitorsStrokeAntidepressive AgentsCentral Nervous System AgentsSelective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID28756557
OpenAlexW2739998369

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.