ArticleIndustrial psychiatry journal2021
Comparative safety and efficacy of tibolone and escitalopram in postmenopausal women.
Article in Industrial psychiatry journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA high prevalence of psychiatric disorders, particularly depressive and anxiety disorders among women is observed through the postmenopausal stage.
aimThe aim of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of tibolone (TIB) and escitalopram (ESCIT) in postmenopausal women (PMW). MATERIALS AND
methodsIt was an interventional, open-label, hospital-based, follow-up study conducted on 60 PMW with the diagnosis of depression as per the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder-5 criteria. Patients were divided into two groups of 30 each, i.e. Group I (TIB-2.5 mg/day) and Group II (ESCIT-10-20 mg/day). The primary outcome was assessed for change in climacteric symptom scores on Greene's Climacteric Scale (GCS), severity of depression and anxiety on Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), and sexual functioning on Arizona Sexual Experience Scale (ASEX). The secondary outcome of well-being was assessed on World Health Organization Quality of life (QOL)-BREF. All the observations were carried out from baseline and at 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks.
resultsBoth the groups showed significant improvement in climacteric and depressive symptoms. However, at the 8
conclusionTIB was better than ESCIT in improving depression, climacteric symptoms, and physical and psychological domain of QoL with an additional benefit of restoring sexual functioning.
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.