-
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica Apr 2022The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of pharmacological interventions to diminish cognitive side effects of ECT. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of pharmacological interventions to diminish cognitive side effects of ECT.
METHODS
Electronic databases of Pubmed, PsycInfo, Embase and Scopus were searched from inception through 1 April, 2021, using terms for ECT (e.g. electroconvulsive therapy), cognitive outcome (e.g. cogni*) and pharmacological intervention (e.g. calcium channel blocker and general terms, like protein). Original studies with humans receiving ECT were included, which applied pharmacological interventions in comparison with placebo or no additive intervention to diminish cognitive side effects. Data quality was assessed using Risk of Bias and GRADE. Random-effects models were used. PROSPERO registration number was CRD42021212773.
RESULTS
Qualitative synthesis (systematic review) showed 52 studies reporting sixteen pharmacological intervention-types. Quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis) included 26 studies (1387 patients) describing twelve pharmacological intervention-types. Low-quality evidence of efficacy was established for memantine (large effect size) and liothyronine (medium effect size). Very low-quality evidence shows effect of acetylcholine inhibitors, piracetam and melatonin in some cognitive domains. Evidence of no efficacy was revealed for ketamine (very low-quality), herbal preparations with anti-inflammatory properties (very low to low-quality) and opioid receptor agonists (low-quality).
CONCLUSION
Memantine and liothyronine are promising for further research and future application. Quality of evidence was low because of differences in ECT techniques, study populations and cognitive measurements. These findings provide a guide for rational choices of potential pharmacological intervention research targets to decrease the burden of cognitive side effects of ECT. Future research should be more uniform in design and attempt to clarify pathophysiological mechanisms of cognitive side effects of ECT.
Topics: Cognition; Electroconvulsive Therapy; Humans; Ketamine; Memantine; Triiodothyronine
PubMed: 35075641
DOI: 10.1111/acps.13397 -
Ageing Research Reviews Dec 2022Dementia is a progressive neurodegenerative syndrome that has no cure. Although a significant proportion of people with dementia progress into the severe stages of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dementia is a progressive neurodegenerative syndrome that has no cure. Although a significant proportion of people with dementia progress into the severe stages of the disease, evidence on the clinical effectiveness of treatments for people with severe dementia remains limited.
AIMS
To systematically review the effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for people living with severe dementia and assess the quality of the evidence.
METHOD
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and online clinical trial registers up to January 2022, for Randomised Controlled Trials (RCT) in people living with severe dementia. Quality and risk of bias were assessed independently by two authors.
RESULTS
A total of 30 trials met our inclusion criteria of which 14 evaluated the effectiveness of pharmacological treatments, and 16 evaluated a non-pharmacological intervention. Pharmacological treatments: Meta-analyses indicated that pharmacological treatments (donepezil: 10 mg, 5 mg; galantamine: 24 mg; memantine: 10 mg) are associated with better outcomes compared to placebo for: severity of symptoms (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.37, 95% CI 0.26-0.48; 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), activities of daily living (SMD 0.15, 95% CI 0.04-0.26; 5 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), and clinical impression of change (Relative Risk (RR) 1.34, 95% CI 1.14-1.57; 4 studies; low-certainty evidence). Pharmacological treatments were also more likely to reduce mortality compared to placebo (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40-0.89; 6 studies; low-certainty evidence). Non-pharmacological treatments: Five trials were included in the meta-analyses of non-pharmacological interventions (multi-sensory stimulation, needs assessment, and activities-based interventions); results showed that non-pharmacological interventions may reduce neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia compared to usual care (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.06; low certainty evidence).
CONCLUSIONS
There is moderate-certainty evidence that pharmacological treatments may decrease disease severity and improve function for people with severe dementia. Non-pharmacological treatments are probably effective in reducing neuropsychiatric symptoms but the quality of evidence remains low. There is an urgent need for high-quality evidence for other outcomes and for developing service-user informed interventions for this under-served group.
Topics: Humans; Dementia; Activities of Daily Living; Memantine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36243355
DOI: 10.1016/j.arr.2022.101758 -
Microbial Pathogenesis Feb 2018This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to consolidate the information on the prevalence of the human influenza virus, including H1N1 and H3N2 as well as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to consolidate the information on the prevalence of the human influenza virus, including H1N1 and H3N2 as well as B-type influenza across Iran from 2000 to December 2016. The literature search was based on keywords including "influenza and Iran", "human influenza", "prevalence", "relative frequency", "incidence", and "drug" in MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, Scopus, ScienceDirect, the Iranian Research Institute for Information Science and Technology (IranDoc), the Regional Information Centre for Science & Technology (RICeST), and the Scientific Information Database (SID). The literature search revealed 25 prevalence and seven drug resistance studies. In order to investigate the publication bias among studies, funnel plots and Egger's test were used. Additionally, the statistical tests of I, Chi, and Tau were computed, and the results were visualized with forest plots. A high level of I and Chi were obtained among studies, which are representative of the high variation and remarkable heterogeneity between studies. This may be because of various methodologies applied in the studies such as study design, age groups, and different populations. The prevalence of influenza H1N1, H3N2, and B in Iran have not yet been well evaluated. The heterogeneity among studies reveals that more attention should be paid to considering various factors, including gender, population size, and underlying conditions.
Topics: Amantadine; Antiviral Agents; Drug Resistance, Viral; Female; Humans; Incidence; Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype; Influenza A Virus, H3N2 Subtype; Influenza B virus; Influenza, Human; Iran; Male; Oseltamivir; Prevalence; Zanamivir
PubMed: 29284132
DOI: 10.1016/j.micpath.2017.12.064 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2015Cocaine misuse is a disorder for which no pharmacological treatment of proven efficacy exists. Advances in neurobiology could guide future medication development. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cocaine misuse is a disorder for which no pharmacological treatment of proven efficacy exists. Advances in neurobiology could guide future medication development.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the efficacy and acceptability of dopamine agonists alone or in combination with any psychosocial intervention for the treatment of of people who misuse cocaine.
SEARCH METHODS
We run the search on 12 January 2015. We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group (CDAG) Specialized Register, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ICTRP, clinicaltrials.gov and screened reference lists.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing dopamine agonists alone or associated with psychosocial intervention with placebo, no treatment or other pharmacological interventions.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty four studies, including 2147 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Comparing any dopamine agonist versus placebo, we found no differences for any of the outcomes considered: dropout (moderate quality of evidence), abstinence (low quality of evidence), severity of dependence (low quality of evidence), adverse events (moderate quality of evidence). This was also observed when single dopamine agonists were compared against placebo. Comparing amantadine versus antidepressants, we found low quality of evidence that antidepressants performed better for abstinence (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.53) based on two studies with 44 participants. No differences were found for dropout or adverse events, for both moderate quality of evidence.The major flaws of the included studies concerned selection bias because most studies did not report information about sequence generation (80%) and allocation concealment methods (86%): half of the included studies were judged at unclear risk of performance bias and 62.5% at unclear risk of detection bias for what concerns subjective outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence from RCTs does not support the use of dopamine agonists for treating cocaine misuse. This absence of evidence may leave to clinicians the alternative of balancing the possible benefits against the potential adverse effects of the treatment. Even the potential benefit of combining a dopamine agonist with a more potent psychosocial intervention, which was suggested by the previous Cochrane Review (Soares 2003), is not supported by the results of this Cochrane Review update.
Topics: Amantadine; Antidepressive Agents; Bromocriptine; Cocaine-Related Disorders; Depression; Dopamine Agonists; Humans; Levodopa; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selection Bias
PubMed: 26014366
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003352.pub4 -
Human Psychopharmacology Sep 2022The United States Food and Drug Administration has approved drugs that address only autism-related symptoms rather than the underlying impairments. N-Methyl-D-Aspartate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The United States Food and Drug Administration has approved drugs that address only autism-related symptoms rather than the underlying impairments. N-Methyl-D-Aspartate receptor antagonists have recently emerged as a promising treatment option for a variety of neurologic and developmental problems, including autism.
AIMS
To review (systematically), for the first time, the medical literature that explores the safety in and efficacy of memantine in autism.
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
A comprehensive electronic search for relevant randomized controlled trials was conducted in four databases. Using RevMan software, we extracted and pooled data as a risk ratio (RR) or normalized mean differences in an inverse variance strategy.
RESULTS
This systematic review and meta-analysis includes five trials. There was no difference in enhancing social responsiveness when compared to placebo, though memantine lowered the likelihood of anxiety (RR = 0.25; 95% Confidence interval: [0.07; 0.87], p = 0.03). However, memantine aggravated impulsive behaviors. Additionally, in another trial that compared memantine added to risperidone versus risperidone added to placebo, memantine was found to be effective and safe.
CONCLUSION
Memantine showed safety in reducing acute symptoms of anxiety and other symptoms encountered in pediatric patients with autism spectrum disorders. However, memantine does not improve the core symptoms of autism. Nevertheless, further long-term trials are needed to explore its potential efficacy.
Topics: Anxiety Disorders; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Child; Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonists; Humans; Memantine; Risperidone
PubMed: 35315131
DOI: 10.1002/hup.2841 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2010Antisocial personality disorder (AsPD) is associated with a wide range of disturbance including persistent rule-breaking, criminality, substance misuse, unemployment,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Antisocial personality disorder (AsPD) is associated with a wide range of disturbance including persistent rule-breaking, criminality, substance misuse, unemployment, homelessness and relationship difficulties.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the potential beneficial and adverse effects of pharmacological interventions for people with AsPD.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1950 to September 2009), EMBASE (1980 to 2009, week 37), CINAHL (1982 to September 2009), PsycINFO (1872 to September 2009) , ASSIA (1987 to September 2009) , BIOSIS (1985 to September 2009), COPAC (September 2009), National Criminal Justice Reference Service Abstracts (1970 to July 2008), Sociological Abstracts (1963 to September 2009), ISI-Proceedings (1981 to September 2009), Science Citation Index (1981 to September 2009), Social Science Citation Index (1981 to September 2009), SIGLE (1980 to April 2006), Dissertation Abstracts (September 2009), ZETOC (September 2009) and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (September 2009).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Controlled trials in which participants with AsPD were randomly allocated to a pharmacological intervention and a placebo control condition. Two trials comparing one drug against another without a placebo control are reported separately.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently selected studies. Two review authors independently extracted data. We calculated mean differences, with odds ratios for dichotomous data.
MAIN RESULTS
Eight studies met the inclusion criteria involving 394 participants with AsPD. Data were available from four studies involving 274 participants with AsPD. No study set out to recruit participants solely on the basis of having AsPD, and in only one study was the sample entirely of AsPD participants. Eight different drugs were examined in eight studies. Study quality was relatively poor. Inadequate reporting meant the data available were generally insufficient to allow any independent statistical analysis. The findings are limited to descriptive summaries based on analyses carried out and reported by the trial investigators. All the available data were derived from unreplicated single reports. Only three drugs (nortriptyline, bromocriptine, phenytoin) were effective compared to placebo in terms of improvement in at least one outcome. Nortriptyline was reported in one study as superior for men with alcohol dependency on mean number of drinking days and on alcohol dependence, but not for severity of alcohol misuse or on the patient's or clinician's rating of drinking. In the same study, both nortriptyline and bromocriptine were reported as superior to placebo on anxiety on one scale but not on another. In one study, phenytoin was reported as superior to placebo on the frequency and intensity of aggressive acts in male prisoners with impulsive (but not premeditated) aggression. In the remaining two studies, both amantadine and desipramine were not superior to placebo for adults with opioid and cocaine dependence, and desipramine was not superior to placebo for men with cocaine dependence.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The body of evidence summarised in this review is insufficient to allow any conclusion to be drawn about the use of pharmacological interventions in the treatment of antisocial personality disorder.
Topics: Adult; Aggression; Alcohol-Related Disorders; Amantadine; Antisocial Personality Disorder; Anxiety; Bromocriptine; Desipramine; Female; Humans; Male; Nortriptyline; Phenytoin; Psychotropic Drugs; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 20687091
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007667.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2001Cocaine is a major drug of abuse. Cocaine dependence is a common and serious condition, which has become nowadays a substantial public health problem. There is a wide... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Cocaine is a major drug of abuse. Cocaine dependence is a common and serious condition, which has become nowadays a substantial public health problem. There is a wide and well documented range of consequences associated to chronic use of this drug, such as medical, psychological and social problems, including the spread of infectious diseases (e.g. AIDS, hepatitis and tuberculosis), crime, violence and neonatal drug exposure. Therapeutic management of the cocaine addicts includes an initial period of abstinence from the drug. During this phase the subjects may experience, besides the intense craving for cocaine, symptoms such as depression, fatigue, irritability, anorexia, and sleep disturbances. It was demonstrated that the acute use of cocaine may enhance dopamine transmission and chronically it decreases dopamine concentrations in the brain. Pharmacological treatment that affects dopamine could theoretically reduce these symptoms and contribute to a more successful therapeutic approach.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and acceptability of dopamine agonists for treating cocaine dependence.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched: The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Cochrane Library, issue 4, 2000), MEDLINE (from 1966 - 2000), EMBASE (from 1980 - 2000), LILACS (from 1982 - 2000), PsycLIT (from 1974 - 2000), Biological Abstracts (1982 to 2000). Reference searching; personal communication; conference abstracts; unpublished trials from pharmaceutical industry; book chapters on treatment of cocaine dependence.
SELECTION CRITERIA
The inclusion criteria for all randomised controlled trials were that they should focus on the use of dopamine agonists on the treatment of cocaine dependence. Trials including patients with additional diagnosis such as opiate dependence were also eligible.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The reviewers extracted the data independently and Relative Risks, weighted mean difference and number needed to treat were estimated. The reviewers assumed that people who died or dropped out had no improvement and tested the sensitivity of the final results to this assumption.
MAIN RESULTS
Twelve studies were included, with 587 participants randomised. Amantadine and Bromocriptine were compared to placebo in most of trials. In two studies amantadine was directly compared to bromocriptine, while amantadine was compared to desipramine, an antidepressant in three. The main efficacy outcome presented was positive urine sample for cocaine metabolites, with no significant differences between interventions. When retention in treatment was assessed as an acceptability measure, it was found a similar rate of patients remaining in treatment in both placebo and active drugs. There were no significant differences in trials where participants had primary cocaine dependence or had additional diagnosis of opioid dependence and/or were in methadone maintenance treatment.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence does not support the clinical use of dopamine agonists in the treatment of cocaine dependence. Given the high rate of dropouts in this population, clinicians may consider adding psychotherapeutic supportive measures aiming to keep patients in treatment.
Topics: Amantadine; Bromocriptine; Cocaine-Related Disorders; Dopamine; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 11687193
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003352 -
Ageing Research Reviews Mar 2022Psychotic symptoms of dementia are highly prevalent and lead to poor medical outcomes and substantial dysfunction. To date, which drug to use remains controversial... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Psychotic symptoms of dementia are highly prevalent and lead to poor medical outcomes and substantial dysfunction. To date, which drug to use remains controversial without a summary of all direct or indirect comparisons of pharmacotherapy. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review with pairwise and network meta-analysis to examine efficacy and tolerability outcomes of pharmacological treatments in dementia patients. MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched systematically up to August 31, 2020. We included trials of cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs), memantine, antipsychotics, antidepressants, and mood stabilizers, with final approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. We ranked the comparative effects of all drugs against placebo with surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. This analysis is based on 34 trials, which included 10,415 patients randomly assigned to 15 commonly used drug regimens. Donepezil (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.30, 95% credible interval [CrI] -0.50 to -0.12; SUCRA, 0.85), memantine (SMD -0.20, 95%CrI -0.34 to -0.07; SUCRA, 0.68) and aripiprazole (SMD -0.17, 95% CrI -0.32 to -0.02; SUCRA, 0.62) showed greater benefit than placebo, and with relatively good tolerability in network meta-analyses. Risperidone was also found to be more efficacious than placebo (SMD -0.16, 95% CrI -0.28 to -0.05; SUCRA, 0.60), but with poor tolerability (odds ratios [OR] 1.50, 95% CrI 1.06-2.26). Donepezil, memantine, haloperidol, aripiprazole and risperidone were more efficacious than quetiapine (SMDs ranged from -0.36 to -0.22). Besides, donepezil, memantine and mirtazapine were more efficacious than sertraline (SMDs ranged from -0.47 to -0.36). Most of the results were rated as "low" to "very low". Several effective treatment choices for psychotic symptoms are available across drug classes. Donepezil, memantine and aripiprazole are probably the appropriate options to consider when a pharmacological treatment is indicated. Given the limitations of the meta-analytic approach and the low methodological quality of the majority of studies, our results should be cautiously interpreted.
Topics: Aripiprazole; Dementia; Donepezil; Humans; Memantine; Network Meta-Analysis; Risperidone; United States
PubMed: 35051646
DOI: 10.1016/j.arr.2022.101568 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2014Persistent feelings of fatigue (or subjective fatigue), which may be experienced in the absence of physiological factors, affect many people with peripheral neuropathy.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Persistent feelings of fatigue (or subjective fatigue), which may be experienced in the absence of physiological factors, affect many people with peripheral neuropathy. A variety of interventions for subjective fatigue are available, but little is known about their efficacy or the likelihood of any adverse effects for people with peripheral neuropathy.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of drugs and physical, psychological or behavioural interventions for fatigue in adults or children with peripheral neuropathy.
SEARCH METHODS
On 5 November 2013, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, LILACS and AMED. We also searched reference lists of all studies identified for inclusion and relevant reviews, and contacted the authors of included studies and known experts in the field to identify additional published or unpublished data. We also searched trials registries for ongoing studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered for inclusion randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing any form of intervention for fatigue management in adults with peripheral neuropathy with placebo, no intervention or an alternative form of intervention for fatigue. Interventions considered included drugs, pacing and grading of physical activity, general or specific exercise, compensatory strategies such as orthotics, relaxation, counselling, cognitive and educational strategies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted study data. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected information on adverse events from the included trials.
MAIN RESULTS
The review includes three trials, which were all at low risk of bias, involving 530 people with peripheral neuropathy. The effects of amantadine from one randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial comparing amantadine with placebo for the treatment of fatigue in 80 people with Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) were uncertain for the proportion of people achieving a favourable outcome six weeks post-intervention (odds ratio (OR) 0.56 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 1.35, N = 74, P = 0.16). We assessed the quality of this evidence as low. Two parallel-group randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled trials comparing the effects of two doses of ascorbic acid with placebo for reducing fatigue in adults with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1A (CMT1A) showed that the effects of ascorbic acid at either dose are probably small (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.12 (95% CI -0.32 to 0.08, n = 404, P = 0.25)) for change in fatigue after 12 to 24 months (moderate quality evidence). Neither ascorbic acid study measured fatigue at four to 12 weeks, which was our primary outcome measure. No serious adverse events were reported with amantadine. Serious adverse events were reported in the trials of ascorbic acid. However,risk of serious adverse events was similar with ascorbic acid and placebo.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
One small imprecise study in people with GBS showed uncertain effects of amantadine on fatigue. In two studies in people with CMT1A there is moderate-quality evidence that ascorbic acid has little meaningful benefit on fatigue. Information about adverse effects was limited, although both treatments appear to be well tolerated and safe in these conditions.There was no evidence available from RCTs to evaluate the effect of other drugs or other interventions for fatigue in either GBS, CMT1A or other causes of peripheral neuropathy. The cost effectiveness of different interventions should also be considered in future randomised clinical trials.
Topics: Adult; Amantadine; Ascorbic Acid; Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease; Child; Fatigue; Guillain-Barre Syndrome; Humans; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25519471
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008146.pub2 -
Drugs & Aging 2006Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia and is characterised by a worsening of cognition, functional ability, and behaviour and mood. The objective... (Review)
Review
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia and is characterised by a worsening of cognition, functional ability, and behaviour and mood. The objective of this study was to review the clinical and cost-effectiveness of memantine for the treatment of patients with moderately severe to severe AD. To achieve this, a systematic search and review of the clinical and cost effectiveness literature for memantine was undertaken. The literature search covered the period from the inception of MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and other electronic databases until July 2004. The search included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and full economic evaluations that assessed the use of memantine in patients with moderately severe to severe AD. Two published RCTs were included in this review; in one of these trials the participants were already being treated with donepezil. The two RCTs showed benefit for patients receiving memantine compared with placebo on the outcome measures of the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living Inventory modified for severe dementia, the Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change Plus Caregiver Input, and the Severe Impairment Battery, and that memantine appeared to be slightly more effective in patients already receiving a stable dose of donepezil. Five cost-effectiveness studies were included in the review. Although these studies reported cost reductions and improved outcomes with memantine, the evaluations were based on a number of assumptions. In conclusion, memantine appears to be beneficial when assessed using functional and global measurements. However, the effect of memantine on cognitive scores and behaviour and mood outcomes is less clear. Cost-effectiveness is dependent upon assumptions surrounding clinical effect and context-specific cost data.
Topics: Aged; Alzheimer Disease; Behavior; Clinical Trials as Topic; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Dopamine Agents; Humans; Memantine; Models, Economic; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 16608378
DOI: 10.2165/00002512-200623030-00005