| Title |
Efficacy and tolerability of topiramate-augmentation therapy for schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ndt.s125367 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yuji Okuyama, Kazuto Oya, Shinji Matsunaga, Taro Kishi, Nakao Iwata |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to perform a comprehensive meta-analysis of topiramate-augmentation therapy in patients with schizophrenia receiving antipsychotic agents. Data published up to June 20, 2016 were obtained from the PubMed, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases. Twelve randomized controlled trials comparing topiramate to placebo or antipsychotic only were included (n=676 patients). The primary outcome was change in overall symptoms. Relative risk (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD), along with 95% confidence intervals, were calculated using random effects model for each outcome. Topiramate-augmentation therapy was superior to the control for decreasing overall symptoms (SMD -0.55, 95% confidence interval -0.86 to -0.24; P=0.001; I(2)=55%, eight comparisons, n=380), positive symptoms (SMD -0.4), negative symptoms (SMD -0.47), and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale general subscale scores (SMD -0.67). Furthermore, topiramate-augmentation therapy decreased weight (SMD -0.69) and body mass index (SMD -0.95) compared with the control. Topiramate was similar to the control with respect to discontinuation due to all causes (RR 1.19), inefficacy (RR 1.71), and adverse events (RR 1.09). Topiramate was associated with higher incidence of paresthesia (RR 2.67) and attention difficulty (RR 8.97) compared with the control. Our results seemed to suggest that topiramate-augmentation therapy improves the psychopathology of schizophrenia with good tolerability and has the additional advantage of weight maintenance. However, because there were some limitations (numbers of studies and patients included in the meta-analysis were small, some studies used completer analysis, Chinese studies were included in the meta-analysis, and studies that had a risk of bias were included in the meta-analysis) in this study, we cannot apply the results of this study in daily clinical practice. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 63 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 17% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 18 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 23% |
| Psychology | 8 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 21 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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
#8,262,107
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,087
of 3,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,142
of 416,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#16
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,132 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
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 416,449 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.