MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011475759 · doi:10.1186/s12888-020-2477-9

Pharmacotherapy of restricted/repetitive behavior in autism spectrum disorder:a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3011475759 on OpenAlexaff
Yanjie Yu, Ashmita Chaulagain, Sindre Andre Pedersen, Stian Lydersen, Bennett Leventhal, Péter Szatmári, Branko Aleksić, Norio Ozaki, Norbert Skokauskas

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Psychiatry · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacotherapyAutism spectrum disorderMeta-analysisPsychologyPsychiatryMEDLINEMedicineClinical psychologyAutismInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This paper is a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of available medications for the treatment of restricted/repetitive behavior (RRBs) in Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). METHOD: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDRS), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE)), Scopus, Epistimonikos, Clinicaltrials.gov, and included all randomized controlled trials published after 1993 that were directed at RRBs in patients with ASD of all ages. We extracted the relevant data from the published studies with a predefined data extraction form and assessed the risk of bias. The primary outcomes were change in restricted/repetitive behavior. We performed a meta-analysis using the random effect model and included studies with given mean and standard deviation. This study is registered with PROSPERO number CRD42018092660). RESULTS: We identified 14 randomized controlled trials that met initial inclusion criteria. After closer inspection, nine trials - involving 552 patients in total - were included in the final analysis. The meta-analysis found no significant difference between medications (including fluvoxamine, risperidone, fluoxetine, citalopram, oxytocin, N-Acetylcysteine, buspirone) and placebo in the treatment of RRBs in ASD (P = 0.20). Similarly, the sub-group meta-analysis also showed no significant difference between Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor (SSRIs) and placebo in the treatment of RRBs in ASD (P = 0.68). There was no evidence of publication bias. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis finds little support for the routine use of medications to treat restricted/repetitive behaviors in Autism Spectrum Disorder. Further research of large, balanced trials with precise assessment tools and long-term follow-up are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol is registered in PROSPERO (Reference number: CRD42018092660).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.040
Bibliometrics0.0100.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations65
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC PsychiatrySame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207