Home › Research › Treatments
[Not Available]
Laure Peyro Saint-Paul, Jocelyne Martin, Cathy Gaillard, Aline Garnier, Brigitte Mosquet, Jean-Sébastien Guillamo, Jean-Jacques Parienti. Therapie, 2015
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
Thirty-three patients were included: the revaluation of anti-dementia treatment led to 22 discontinuations and 11 continuations. Motivations to stop antidementia treatment were: too advanced dementia (48%), lack of therapeutic benefit (28%) or too much of psychotropic medications (24%). The sudden discontinuation was well tolerated with no withdrawal syndrome observed. The variation of MMSE at 6months was -1.8 (SD 2.2) in the discontinuation group (n=14) versus -2.2 (SD 2.0) in the continuation group (n=6). The psycho-behavior disorders have not been aggravated. A reduction in number of psychotropic drugs in the discontinuation group was observed. In this pilot study, the revaluation in accordance with the recommendations of the Haute autorité de santé (HAS) led to the discontinuation of two third of anti-dementia drugs. Safety of sudden discontinuation of MSD remains to be studied.
Key findings
- Thirty-three patients were included: the revaluation of anti-dementia treatment led to 22 discontinuations and 11 continuations.
- Motivations to stop antidementia treatment were: too advanced dementia (48%), lack of therapeutic benefit (28%) or too much of psychotropic medications (24%).
- The sudden discontinuation was well tolerated with no withdrawal syndrome observed.
- The variation of MMSE at 6months was -1.8 (SD 2.2) in the discontinuation group (n=14) versus -2.2 (SD 2.0) in the continuation group (n=6).
- The psycho-behavior disorders have not been aggravated.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Participants14
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 61/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 34 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 61 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Therapie) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2015 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 14 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 27393634) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 34 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 34 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 61 out of 100. |
| Total | 61 / 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.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Saint-Paul, L. P., Martin, J., Gaillard, C., Garnier, A., Mosquet, B., Guillamo, J.-S., et al. (2015). [Not Available]. Therapie. https://doi.org/10.2515/therapie/2014217
Vancouver
Saint-Paul LP, Martin J, Gaillard C, Garnier A, Mosquet B, Guillamo J.-S, et al. [Not Available]. Therapie. 2015. doi:10.2515/therapie/2014217. PMID: 27393634.
BibTeX
@article{saintpaul2015-27393634,
author = {Saint-Paul, Laure Peyro and Martin, Jocelyne and Gaillard, Cathy and Garnier, Aline and Mosquet, Brigitte and Guillamo, Jean-Sébastien and Parienti, Jean-Jacques},
title = {{[Not Available]}},
journal = {Therapie},
year = {2015},
doi = {10.2515/therapie/2014217},
pmid = {27393634},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2515/therapie/2014217}
}