Home › Research › Drug development
Lithium Exposure and Risk of Major Neurocognitive Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Qing Huang, Xue-Qin Ma, Hui-Fang Chen. Journal of clinical psychopharmacology, 2024-05-15
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
Eight studies with 377,060 subjects were included in the analysis. In the general population on the association between lithium use versus nonuse and dementia, the OR was 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.77-1.24). Further analysis also demonstrated that lithium use was not associated with an increased risk of Alzheimer's disease (OR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.31-1.65). When the analysis was restricted to individuals with bipolar disorder to reduce the confounding by clinical indication, lithium exposure was also not associated with a decreased risk of MNCD (OR = 0.9, 95% CI = 0.71-1.15). The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis do not support a significant association between lithium use and the risk of MNCD.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Huang, Q., Ma, X.-Q., & Chen, H.-F. (2024). Lithium Exposure and Risk of Major Neurocognitive Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Journal of clinical psychopharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1097/jcp.0000000000001863
Vancouver
Huang Q, Ma X.-Q, Chen H.-F. Lithium Exposure and Risk of Major Neurocognitive Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Journal of clinical psychopharmacology. 2024. doi:10.1097/jcp.0000000000001863. PMID: 38743015.
BibTeX
@article{huang2024-38743015,
author = {Huang, Qing and Ma, Xue-Qin and Chen, Hui-Fang},
title = {{Lithium Exposure and Risk of Major Neurocognitive Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis}},
journal = {Journal of clinical psychopharmacology},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.1097/jcp.0000000000001863},
pmid = {38743015},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1097/jcp.0000000000001863}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Eight studies with 377,060 subjects were included in the analysis.
- In the general population on the association between lithium use versus nonuse and dementia, the OR was 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.77-1.24).
- Further analysis also demonstrated that lithium use was not associated with an increased risk of Alzheimer's disease (OR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.31-1.65).
- When the analysis was restricted to individuals with bipolar disorder to reduce the confounding by clinical indication, lithium exposure was also not associated with a decreased risk of MNCD (OR = 0.9, 95% CI = 0.71-1.15).
- The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis do not support a significant association between lithium use and the risk of MNCD.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Study designsystematic review
- Participants377,060
- Effect sizeOR = 0.69; OR = 0.9
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 89/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a systematic review of all the studies on the question. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 50 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 89 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of clinical psychopharmacology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A systematic review of all the studies on the question |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 4 / 5 | 2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 4 / 4 | 377,060 participants |
| Effect reported | 3 / 3 | Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomization is not credited here |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 38743015) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 50 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 50 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 89 out of 100. |
| Total | 89 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Drug development
Also tagged “late-life-depression”
139 studies in the library carry the topic tag “late-life-depression”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 139 tagged studies.