ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)2021
Pharmacological treatment trials of agitation in Alzheimer's disease: A systematic review of ClinicalTrials.gov registered trials.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Brexpiprazole for agitation in alzheimer's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Indian journal of psychiatry · 2025Review
- An investigation of psychoactive polypharmacy and related gender-differences in older adults with dementia: a retrospective cohort study.BMC geriatrics · 2023Article
- Clinical relevance of biomarkers, new therapeutic approaches, and role of post-translational modifications in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Review
- Emotional and Neuropsychiatric Disorders Associated with Alzheimer's Disease.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2022Review
- Pharmacological treatment trials of agitation in Alzheimer's disease: A systematic review of ClinicalTrials.gov registered trials.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) · 2021Article
- Three approaches to determining clinically meaningful benefit on the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory in dementia clinical trials for agitation.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThere is increasing emphasis on the importance of optimizing and standardizing clinical trials of agitation in Alzheimer's disease (AD), but the risks of bias arising from published trials and the number and design of unpublished studies are poorly understood.
methodsUsing the ClinicalTrials.gov database, we systematically reviewed all registered investigational clinical trials for agitation in AD to describe the landscape of agitation drug treatment trials and to assess their quality and generalizability.
resultsWe included 52 clinical studies registered over the past 25 years. Within published randomized controlled trials (RCTs), there was a high rate of participant dropout, poor reporting of randomization procedures, and inconsistent definitions of the sample included for analysis. There was also evidence of publication and funder bias. DISCUSSION: We discuss factors that limit the internal and external validity of published RCTs and make additional recommendations for the conduct and reporting of future clinical trials of agitation in AD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.