↓ Skip to main content

Comparative Utility of Atypical Antipsychotics for the Treatment of Psychosis in Parkinson’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparative Utility of Atypical Antipsychotics for the Treatment of Psychosis in Parkinson’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis
Published in
Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin, January 2017
DOI 10.1248/bpb.b17-00602
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ryo Iketani, Yohei Kawasaki, Hiroshi Yamada

Abstract

We performed a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis to determine atypical antipsychotics that are effective and safe for the treatment of psychosis in Parkinson's disease (PD). We conducted a comprehensive literature search using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Japana Centra Revuo Medicina (Ichu-shi Web). We used randomized controlled trials evaluating the utility of atypical antipsychotics for the treatment of psychosis in PD using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Unified PD rating Scale parts III (UPDRS-III) as the endpoints. Posterior distributions of mean differences between each treatment and placebo were estimated using Bayesian network meta-analysis. The distributions describing each treatment effect were expressed as means (95% credible intervals). Ten trials involving any two treatment arms using clozapine (64 subjects in four trials), olanzapine (99 subjects in three trials), quetiapine (79 subjects in five trials), risperidone (five subjects in one trial), or placebo (156 subjects in seven trials) were finally included in the present study. Pooled estimates of each posterior distribution based on the BPRS were as follows: clozapine, -2.0 (-6.7 to 2.7); olanzapine, 0.5 (-2.3 to 3.4); quetiapine, 0.3 (-3.9 to 4.5); and risperidone, -4.7 (-57.4 to 53.3). Based on the UPDRS-III, the pooled estimates were clozapine, 0.7 (-3.8 to 4.3); olanzapine, 2.8 (0.8 to 5.1); quetiapine, 3.3 (-0.7 to 5.8); and risperidone, 4.5 (-57.7 to 63.4). Although clozapine had an effective and relatively safe profile, all atypical antipsychotics included in the present study may be unsafe, as they may worsen motor function when compared to placebo.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Master 9 15%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 4 7%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 18 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 27%
Neuroscience 8 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Psychology 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 24 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 November 2017.
All research outputs
#15,482,347
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin
#2,084
of 2,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#257,334
of 421,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin
#38
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,963 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 421,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.