ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2024
Safety and efficacy of sertraline in depression among adults undergoing dialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- The impact of olezarsen on hypertriglyceridemia in high cardiovascular risk patients: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- A meta-analytic review of the safety and efficacy of semaglutide in type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease patients.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Depression is prevalent among patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing dialysis, with significant implications for their quality of life and treatment compliance. Traditional treatments for depression, including various therapies and pharmacological interventions, have limitations due to their adverse effects. Sertraline, a selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor (SSRI), offers a promising alternative, but its efficacy and safety in this population require thorough evaluation. Objective: This meta-analysis aims to assess the effectiveness and adverse effects of sertraline in treating depressive episodes in dialysis patients compared to placebo. Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, the authors conducted a comprehensive search of databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct, up to 20 June 2024. The authors included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared sertraline with placebo in dialysis patients with depression. Two researchers independently performed data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Statistical analysis was conducted using ReviewManager 5.4.1, employing a random effects model. Results: Four RCTs involving 468 participants were included. Sertraline significantly reduced depressive symptoms, as measured by the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS) and Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) scores, at 6 and 12 weeks compared to placebo. Improvements in kidney disease-specific quality of life (KDQOL-36) scores were also noted. However, sertraline was associated with a higher risk of adverse events compared to placebo. Conclusions: Sertraline effectively reduces depressive symptoms and improves the quality of life in dialysis patients with ESRD. Despite the increased risk of adverse events, the overall benefits make sertraline a viable treatment option for this population. Larger, more comprehensive studies are needed to confirm these findings and optimize sertraline use in clinical practice.
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.