MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4210283868 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001944

Thioridazine for schizophrenia

2000· review· en· W4210283868 sur OpenAlexaff
Ajmiri Sultana, J. Reilly, Mark Fenton

Notice bibliographique

RevueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2000
Typereview
Langueen
Domaine
Thématique
Établissements canadiensCochrane
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésThioridazineMedicineNumber needed to treatAdverse effectPsychiatryCochrane LibraryPlaceboSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Relative riskAntipsychoticConfidence intervalInternal medicineChlorpromazineAlternative medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Thioridazine is a piperidine phenothiazine used for the treatment of people with schizophrenia. It has often been considered the drug of choice in the elderly because of reputed lower levels of extrapyramidal adverse events. It may, however, be more likely to cause cognitive adverse events, such as delirium or worsening of memory, and, on rare occasions, thioridazine has caused pigmentary retinopathy. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of thioridazine for those with schizophrenia, and, in particular, elderly people with schizophrenia. SEARCH STRATEGY: Electronic searches of Biological Abstracts (1980-1999), CINAHL (1982-1999), The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 1999), The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (January 1999), EMBASE (1980-1999), MEDLINE (1966-1999), PsycLIT (1974-1999) and Sociofile (1974-1999) were undertaken. References of all identified studies were searched for further trials. Pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised clinical trials that compared thioridazine to other treatments for people with schizophrenia or other psychoses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Citations and, where possible, abstracts were independently inspected by reviewers, papers ordered, re-inspected and quality assessed. Data were independently extracted. Data were excluded if loss to follow up was greater than 40%. For homogeneous dichotomous data the Relative Risk (RR), 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where appropriate, the number needed to treat (NNT) were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, weighted mean differences were calculated (WMD). All data were inspected for heterogeneity. MAIN RESULTS: 560 people from 11 studies were randomised to thioridazine or placebo. For change in global state, small, short term studies (three months or less) found no difference between groups (RR 0.66 CI 0.35-1.23, n=100). At six months, however, two small studies (n=65) favoured thioridazine (RR 0.34 CI 0.21-0. 56, NNT 2 CI 1-6). Fourteen percent in the thioridazine group left early compared to 32% of people allocated to placebo (RR 0.43 CI 0. 31-0.61, NNT 6 CI 4-10, n=510). Few differences in terms of adverse effects, between thioridazine and placebo, were apparent. Limited data from trials suggest that thioridazine is not strongly anticholinergic (blurred vision RR 2.01 CI 0.56-7.25, n=224). Thioridazine is not sedating (at three months to one year RR 2.48 CI 0.96-6.4, n=122). No data were presented on retinal changes. Two thousand three hundred ninety-seven patients from 26 studies were randomised to thioridazine versus typical antipsychotics. For the outcome 'no better or worse', those allocated to thioridazine were no better off than people given control typical neuroleptics (RR 0. 97 CI 0.78-1.21, n=771). There were no clear differences between thioridazine and other drugs for the outcome 'Mental state - no better or worse' on the BPRS by three months (RR 1.3 CI 0.8-2.11, n=208). Twenty-one studies (n=1737) had 19% attrition in both groups. Few differences were seen in the lists of adverse effects. As expected from the placebo comparison, thioridazine does not cause more anticholinergic-type symptoms than other drugs. About half of people given thioridazine felt drowsy or sedated but this was no different from other drugs (RR 1.06 CI 0.93-1.2, n=909). Parkinsonism was less common in the thioridazine group in the short term (RR 0.29 CI 0.12-0.7, n=340). One small study (n=40) found no clear differences between thioridazine and clozapine. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Although there are shortcomings and gaps in the data, there appears to be enough consistency over different outcomes and periods to confirm that thioridazine is an antipsychotic of similar efficacy to other commonly used neuroleptics for people with schizophrenia. Its adverse events profile is similar to that of other drugs, but it may have a lower level of extrapyramidal problems. (ABSTRACT TRU

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,025
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,085

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0250,003

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,155
Tête enseignante GPT0,407
Écart entre enseignants0,252 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations8
Publié2000
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsTravaux en français237 207