SynthesisComputational and mathematical methods in medicine2022
Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Olanzapine versus Clozapine when Treating Senile Dementia.
Synthesis in Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Finding risk factors for dementia in patients with schizophrenia: a population-based case-control study.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Retracted: Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Olanzapine versus Clozapine when Treating Senile Dementia.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2023-09-27Concerns/Issues about Data · Concerns/Issues about Results and/or Conclusions · Concerns/Issues about Referencing/Attributions · Concerns/Issues about Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Investigation by Third Party · Paper Mill · Computer-Aided Content or Computer-Generated Content · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions · · See also: https://pubpeer.com/publications/A694C40F05CBE6C66E8EE843BF7554
- Retracted
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically assess the safety and efficacy of olanzapine versus clozapine when treating senile dementia and to provide evidence-based medicine basis for its promotion and use. Methods: PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, China Knowledge Network Database (CNKI), China VIP Database, Wanfang Database, and China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) online database were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) of olanzapine and clozapine when treating senile dementia. The retrieval time limit is from the establishment of the database to the present. The data were extracted independently by two researchers, and the bias risk of each contained literature was analyzed in accordance with the standard of Cochrane Handbook 5.3. RevMan 5.4 statistical software was used to analyze the collected data by meta-analysis. Results: Finally, 6 randomized controlled trial articles were included, with a total of 490 samples. Meta-analysis of clinical efficacy showed that the clinical efficacy was similar and there was no significant difference ( Conclusion: Olanzapine and clozapine have similar efficacy when treating mental and behavioral disorders in patients with senile dementia, in which olanzapine is more effective in improving the symptoms of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD), with less adverse reactions and high safety, which is worth popularizing in clinical practice. However, more studies and follow-up with higher methodological quality and longer intervention time are needed to further verify.
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.