Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32361940›Full record

SynthesisCNS drugs2020

Cognitive Efficacy of Pharmacologic Treatments in Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review.

Michelle H Chen, Yael Goverover, Helen M Genova, John DeLuca

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in CNS drugs, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2026
    Article
  6. Cognitive dysfunction and multiple sclerosis.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Michelle H ChenKessler Foundation, East Hanover, NJ, USA.
Yael GoveroverKessler Foundation, East Hanover, NJ, USA.
Helen M GenovaKessler Foundation, East Hanover, NJ, USA.
John DeLucaKessler Foundation, East Hanover, NJ, USA. jdeluca@kesslerfoundation.org.
Kessler Foundation · USNew York University · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCognitive impairment is prevalent and debilitating among persons with multiple sclerosis (MS). While many pharmacologic treatments have shown good efficacy in reducing clinical relapses, brain lesions, and improving certain physical symptoms, their efficacy for improving cognitive function is not well understood.

objectivesThe current systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of pharmacologic treatments for improving cognitive function among persons with MS.

methodsA literature search was conducted through the PubMed and PsycINFO databases. Two independent reviewers assessed each paper, and a third reviewer weighed in if the two reviewers could not reach a consensus. Classification of evidence was determined using the 2017 American Academy of Neurology (AAN) criteria for therapeutic trials. Standardized effect sizes (Cohen's d) were calculated to compare across studies.

resultsEighty-seven journal articles published between 1990 and January 2020 were included in the current review. Overall, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of pharmacologic treatments to improve cognitive function in persons with MS. There were many contradictory findings observed in this review, which may be due to possible unidentified moderating treatment response variables and/or lack of standardization in assessment procedures. There was also an overreliance on statistical significance (most papers did not provide sizes of treatment effects), which may not be clinically meaningful.

conclusionsHigher-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the cognitive efficacy of pharmacologic treatments for MS-related cognitive dysfunction, with cognition as the primary endpoint. Researchers are urged to use standardized criteria (such as the AAN criteria) to guide their research designs. Clinicians should consider effect sizes of studies before deciding whether to prescribe certain medications to ameliorate cognitive symptoms.

Indexed as

CognitionCognitive DysfunctionHumansMultiple SclerosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID32361940
PMCPMC7275014
OpenAlexW3022880097

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.