ArticleSystematic reviews2025
Comparative safety of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine for dementia: a protocol for a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Computational Repurposing of Janus Kinase Inhibitors as Potential Therapeutic Candidates for Alzheimer's Disease.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Real-world evidence for amyloid-targeted therapies: Lecanemab and donanemab.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDementia is a growing public health concern, affecting over 55 million people worldwide, with Alzheimer's disease (AD) being the most prevalent cause. Cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) and memantine remain the mainstay pharmacological treatment for AD and other dementias, despite their modest benefits and potential adverse effects. The safety profiles of these medications, particularly at different doses and formulations, remain inadequately explored, necessitating a comprehensive evaluation.
methodsThis systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) will assess the safety of ChEIs (donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine) and memantine in dementia treatment. We will include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with ≥ 3 months of follow-up, evaluating adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and treatment discontinuation rates. A comprehensive literature search will be conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, with additional searches in Google Scholar and reference lists of included studies. Data extraction will follow a standardized approach, and study quality will be assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool-2. A Frequentist or Bayesian NMA framework will be used to compare safety profiles, with heterogeneity assessed using the I DISCUSSION: By addressing gaps in prior NMAs, this study aims to provide an in-depth evaluation of safety outcomes associated with different ChEI and memantine doses and formulations across various dementia types. The findings will support clinicians in making informed treatment decisions and guide future research and policy development for dementia management. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42025642902).
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.