Efficacy of cognitive enhancers for Alzheimer's disease: Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Systematic Reviews

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2009, Pages

  Tricco, Andrea C ^a   vanderVaart, Sondra ^a   Soobiah, Charlene ^a   Lillie, Erin ^a   Perrier, Laure ^a   Chen, Maggie H ^a   Hemmelgarn, Brenda ^b   Majumdar, Sumit R ^c,d   Straus, Sharon E ^a,d  

^a ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

NOOTROPIC AGENT;

ALZHEIMER DISEASE; ARTICLE; ECONOMICS; HUMAN; LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); METHODOLOGY;

ALZHEIMER DISEASE; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; NOOTROPIC AGENTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84872287771     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20464053     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-1-31     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Prince M, Jackson J. Alzheimer's Disease International: World Alzheimer Report 2009, [http://www.alz.co.uk/research/world-report].
2. Williams T. Alzheimer's Disease to cost United States $20 trillion over next 40 years 2010, Washington, DC: Alzheimer's Association.
3. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) Dementia in Australia: National data analysis and development 2007, Canberra: AIHW, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW).
4. Alzheimer Society of Canada Rising Tide: The Impact of Dementia on Canadian Society 2010, Toronto: Alzheimer Society of Canada, Alzheimer Society of Canada.
5. Chertkow H. Diagnosis and treatment of dementia: introduction. Introducing a series based on the Third Canadian Consensus Conference on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Dementia. CMAJ 2008, 178:316-321. 2211335, 18227452.
6. Clare L, Woods RT, Moniz Cook ED, Orrell M, Spector A. Cognitive rehabilitation and cognitive training for early-stage Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003, 4:CD003260.
7. Gitlin LN, Winter L, Dennis MP, Hodgson N, Hauck WW. A biobehavioral home-based intervention and the well-being of patients with dementia and their caregivers: the COPE randomized trial. JAMA 2010, 304:983-991. 10.1001/jama.2010.1253, 20810376.
8. Thompson C. Assessing the effectiveness of support for the carers of people with Alzheimer's diseases. Nurs Times 1998, 94:49.
9. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence Dementia: Supporting people with dementia and their carers in health and social care http://guidance.nice.org.uk/TA111 Accessed 26 June 2012, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.
10. Perras C, Shukla VK, Lessard C, Skidmore B, Bergman H, Gauthier S. Cholinesterase inhibitors for Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials [Technology report no 58] 2005, Ottawa, Ontario: Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment.
11. Hansen RA, Gartlehner G, Webb AP, Morgan LC, Moore CG, Jonas DE. Efficacy and safety of donepezil, galantamine, and rivastigmine for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Interv Aging 2008, 3:211-225. 2546466,2546466, 18686744.
12. Birks J. Cholinesterase inhibitors for Alzheimer's disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006, 1:CD005593.
13. Park-Wyllie LY, Mamdani MM, Li P, Gill SS, Laupacis A, Juurlink DN. Cholinesterase inhibitors and hospitalization for bradycardia: a population-based study. PLoS Med 2009, 6:e1000157. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000157, 2742897, 19787032.
14. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 2009, 339:b2535. 10.1136/bmj.b2535, 2714657, 19622551.
15. Fink A, Kosecoff J, Chassin M, Brook RH. Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use. Am J Public Health 1984, 74:979-983. 10.2105/AJPH.74.9.979, 1651783, 6380323.
16. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Atkins D, Brozek J, Vist G, Alderson P, Glasziou P, Falck-Ytter Y, Schunemann HJ. GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2011, 64:395-400. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.09.012, 21194891.
17. SysRev Tool SysRev Tool 2011, Toronto Canada: Toronto Canada, http://www.ktclearinghouse.ca/., SysRev Tool.
18. Moher D, Tsertsvadze A, Tricco AC, Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Sampson M, Barrowman N. When and how to update systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008, (1:MR000023.
19. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33:159-174. 10.2307/2529310, 843571.
20. Chan AW, Altman DG. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. BMJ 2005, 330:753. 10.1136/bmj.38356.424606.8F, 555875, 15681569.
21. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011] 2011, Oxford: UK: The Cochrane Collaboration, Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org.Wiley.
22. Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Draft Risk of Bias Tool Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Draft Risk of Bias Tool 2011, Oxford, UK: Wiley, http://epoccochrane.org/epoc-resources-review-authors., Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Draft Risk of Bias Tool.
23. Wells G, Shea BJ, O'Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses.es 2011, Available: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp.
24. Egger M, Davey SG, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997, 315:629-634. 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629, 2127453, 9310563.
25. Chou R, Aronson N, Atkins D, Ismaila AS, Santaguida P, Smith DH, Whitlock E, Wilt TJ, Moher D. AHRQ series paper 4: assessing harms when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the effective health-care program. J Clin Epidemiol 2010, 63:502-512. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.06.007, 18823754.
26. Santaguida P, Raina P, Ismaila A. The development of the McHarm quality assessment scale for adverse events Hamilton, Canada, [http://hiru.mcmaster.ca/epc/mcharm.pdf].
27. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986, 7:177-188. 10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2, 3802833.
28. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002, 21:1539-1558. 10.1002/sim.1186, 12111919.
29. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Meta-regression approaches 2004, Rockville, MD: AHRQ, Public Report No 04-0033, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).
30. SAS version 9.1 2004, SAS institute, Cary, NC, SAS.
31. Littell JH, Pillai V. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis 2008, New York: Oxford University Press.
32. Carpenter J, Rucker G, Schwarzer G. Assessing the sensitivity of meta-analysis to selection bias: a multiple imputation approach. Biometrics 2011, 67:1066-1072. 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2010.01498.x, 21039395.
33. The bugs project Winbugs 2011, MRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge UK, [http://www.mrc-bsucamacuk/bugs/winbugs/contents.shtml], The bugs project.
34. Fu R, Gartlehner G, Grant M, et al. Conducting quantitative synthesis when comparing medical interventions AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program, [posted October 2010]. Available from: http://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/. [Accessed November 20, 2011.
35. Lu G, Ades AE. Stat Med 2004, 23:3105-3124. 10.1002/sim.1875, 15449338.