ReviewTherapeutic advances in psychopharmacology2023
The past, present and future of anticholinergic drugs.
Review in Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology, 2023. 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.
- Moving beyond 5-HTPsychopharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In current medical practice, it is difficult to find any reports claiming that drugs that are primarily anticholinergic or those that have significant anticholinergic effects have any therapeutic benefits. These drugs fell into disrepute within the mental health field from the mid-1960s onwards, and their supposed problems extended to elsewhere in medicine after that. There is considerable evidence that this disrepute stemmed more from marketing copy rather than from hard clinical trial data. Many apparent reviews appear to repeat prior claims rather than present substantial or new evidence. This article offers a perspective rather than a systematic review as there is little evidence other than claims to review. The aim is to challenge the conventional narrative that anticholinergic effects are uniquely hazardous by pointing to the uncertain basis for claims about the harms of anticholinergic drugs, antimuscarinic drugs in particular, ending with pointers to recent research that, if realized, might underpin important possible future benefits.
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.