SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Anti-obesity medications and cognitive disorder risk: a discrepancy between RCTs and real-world evidence.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the association between anti-obesity medication (AOM) use and the risk of cognitive disorder in individuals with overweight and obesity. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and Clinicaltrials.gov from inception to August 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of AOMs. Relative risks were calculated using a random-effect model. Results: Our analysis included 4 RCTs (n = 35,924; 17,963 AOM users, 17,961 placebo recipients) and 2 retrospective cohort studies (n = 2,303,492; 1,151,746 GLP-1RA users, 1,151,746 non-users). In RCTs, the use of AOMs was not associated with a lower risk of cognitive disorder (RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.39 to 2.25, P = 0.88) or dementia (RR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.54, P = 0.97) versus placebo. Every 5-kg weight reduction mediated by AOMs was not associated with a decreased risk of cognitive disorder (RR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.05, P = 0.82) compared with placebo. Meta-regression further confirmed that neither absolute weight loss nor weight reduction difference between AOM and placebo groups was associated with a reduced risk of cognitive disorder. However, retrospective cohort studies showed that GLP-1RA users had lower risks of cognitive disorder (OR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.91, P = 0.03) and Alzheimer's disease (OR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.97, P = 0.04) than non-users. Conclusion: While short-term RCTs did not observe a substantial cognitive benefit of AOMs, real-world evidence indicated that GLP-1RAs may offer potential protection against cognitive disorders. These divergent findings highlight the need for long-term prospective trials with dedicated cognitive endpoints.
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.