Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33483830›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2021

Aspirin in people with dementia, long-term benefits, and harms: a systematic review.

Katrina A S Davis, Delia Bishara, Mariam Molokhia, Christoph Mueller, Gayan Perera, Robert J Stewart

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Aspirin in people with dementia.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Katrina A S DavisKing's College London Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience, London, UK. katrina.davis@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5945-4646
Delia BisharaKing's College London Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6254-2054
Mariam MolokhiaKing's College London Population Health Sciences, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1989-7327
Christoph MuellerKing's College London Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9816-1686
Gayan PereraKing's College London Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3414-303X
Robert J StewartKing's College London Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4435-6397
King's College London · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/V049879/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePeople with dementia may have indications for aspirin prescription and clinicians are asked to balance the potential risks against benefits. This review examines the evidence for the risk and benefit of long-term aspirin use in people with dementia aged over 65 years, including randomised controlled trials and observational studies.

methodsWe searched three databases for research published between 2007 and 2020. Each eligible article was assessed for risk of bias, and confidence in findings was rated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

resultsFour papers met inclusion criteria: one randomised controlled trial, two cohort studies, and one with pooled data. All looked only at dementia of Alzheimer's type, and none addressed myocardial or cerebral infarction as outcomes. Dementia progression was reported by two studies, with conflicting results. The trial found no significant effect of aspirin on mortality (odds ratio aspirin vs. no aspirin 1.07, 95% confidence interval 0.58-1.97) but found more events of severe bleeding with aspirin (OR aspirin vs. no aspirin 6.9, 1.5-31.2). An excess in intracranial haemorrhage in the aspirin group was judged plausible based on two non-randomised studies.

conclusionsThe review findings are limited because studies include only people with Alzheimer's-type dementia and lack confirmatory studies, although an increased risk of bleeding events is recognised. Further research that addresses the benefits and risks of aspirin in more representative groups of people with dementia is needed to guide prescribing decisions.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAlzheimer DiseaseAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAspirinCardiovascular DiseasesDisease ProgressionHemorrhageHumansObservational Studies as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAspirinAspirinDementiaEvidence-based medicineMultimorbiditySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33483830
PMCPMC8184554
OpenAlexW3119049654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.