Putting the efficacy of psychiatric and general medicine medication into perspective: review of meta-analyses

Author:

Leucht Stefan,Hierl Sandra,Kissling Werner,Dold Markus,Davis John M.

Abstract

BackgroundThe efficacy of psychopharmacological treatments has been called into question. Psychiatrists are unfamiliar with the effectiveness of common medical drugs.AimsTo put the efficacy of psychiatric drugs into the perspective of that of major medical drugs.MethodWe searched Medline and the Cochrane Library for systematic reviews on the efficacy of drugs compared with placebo for common medical and psychiatric disorders, and systematically presented the effect sizes for primary efficacy outcomes.ResultsWe included 94 meta-analyses (48 drugs in 20 medical diseases, 16 drugs in 8 psychiatric disorders). There were some general medical drugs with clearly higher effect sizes than the psychotropic agents, but the psychiatric drugs were not generally less efficacious than other drugs.ConclusionsAny comparison of different outcomes in different diseases can only serve the purpose of a qualitative perspective. The increment of improvement by drug over placebo must be viewed in the context of the disease's seriousness, suffering induced, natural course, duration, outcomes, adverse events and societal values.

Publisher

Royal College of Psychiatrists

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health

Reference102 articles.

1. British Guideline on the Management of Asthma

2. Clomipramine in the treatment of patients with obsessive–compulsive disorder;Arch Gen Psychiatry,1991

3. A quantitative analysis of clinical drug trials for the treatment of affective disorders;Davis;Psychopharmacol Bull,1993

4. Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of fluoxetine v. placebo and tricyclic antidepressants in the short-term treatment of major depression

5. How effective are second-generation antipsychotic drugs? A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials

Cited by 335 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3