PortalPublikationenFragliche Evidenz für den Einsatz des Cholinesterasehemmers ...

Fragliche Evidenz für den Einsatz des Cholinesterasehemmers Donepezil bei Alzheimer-Demenz -- eine systematische Ubersichtsarbeit

Standard

Fragliche Evidenz für den Einsatz des Cholinesterasehemmers Donepezil bei Alzheimer-Demenz -- eine systematische Ubersichtsarbeit. / Kaduszkiewicz, H; Beck-Bornholdt, H-P; Bussche van den, Hendrik; Zimmermann, T.

in: FORTSCHR NEUROL PSYC, Jahrgang 72, Nr. 10, 10.2004, S. 557-563.

Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/Zeitung › SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz › Forschung › Begutachtung

Harvard

Kaduszkiewicz, H, Beck-Bornholdt, H-P, Bussche van den, H & Zimmermann, T 2004, 'Fragliche Evidenz für den Einsatz des Cholinesterasehemmers Donepezil bei Alzheimer-Demenz -- eine systematische Ubersichtsarbeit', FORTSCHR NEUROL PSYC, Jg. 72, Nr. 10, S. 557-563. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-830077

APA

Kaduszkiewicz, H., Beck-Bornholdt, H-P., Bussche van den, H., & Zimmermann, T. (2004). Fragliche Evidenz für den Einsatz des Cholinesterasehemmers Donepezil bei Alzheimer-Demenz -- eine systematische Ubersichtsarbeit. FORTSCHR NEUROL PSYC, 72(10), 557-563. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-830077

Vancouver

Kaduszkiewicz H, Beck-Bornholdt H-P, Bussche van den H, Zimmermann T. Fragliche Evidenz für den Einsatz des Cholinesterasehemmers Donepezil bei Alzheimer-Demenz -- eine systematische Ubersichtsarbeit. FORTSCHR NEUROL PSYC. 2004 Okt;72(10):557-563. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-830077

Bibtex

@article{a683246a89074f7eb072ea8895316eda,
title = "Fragliche Evidenz f{\"u}r den Einsatz des Cholinesterasehemmers Donepezil bei Alzheimer-Demenz -- eine systematische Ubersichtsarbeit",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: Objective of this systematic review is to determine the level of scientific evidence for the use of Donepezil in Alzheimer's Disease. METHODS: Ten randomised controlled double-blind trials testing Donepezil versus Placebo were identified in MEDLINE and EMBASE. All ten trials were included in this systematic review. Following a detailed catalogue of criteria the methodological standard of the ten trials was assessed. RESULTS: The authors of eight trials postulated statistically significant differences in favour of Donepezil. Unfortunately, the methodological standard of all studies was insufficient. The methodological shortcomings are discussed in detail. CONCLUSION: With regard to severe methodological deficiencies the evidence for the use of Donepezil in moderate to severe Alzheimer's Disease is lacking. But even if the trials had been conducted in a methodologically correct way the clinical relevance of the postulated positive results would have to be questioned.",
keywords = "Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Cholinesterase Inhibitors, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Female, Humans, Indans, Male, Nootropic Agents, Piperidines, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Research Design",
author = "H Kaduszkiewicz and H-P Beck-Bornholdt and {Bussche van den}, Hendrik and T Zimmermann",
year = "2004",
month = oct,
doi = "10.1055/s-2004-830077",
language = "Deutsch",
volume = "72",
pages = "557--563",
journal = "FORTSCHR NEUROL PSYC",
issn = "0720-4299",
publisher = "Georg Thieme Verlag KG",
number = "10",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Fragliche Evidenz für den Einsatz des Cholinesterasehemmers Donepezil bei Alzheimer-Demenz -- eine systematische Ubersichtsarbeit

AU - Kaduszkiewicz, H

AU - Beck-Bornholdt, H-P

AU - Bussche van den, Hendrik

AU - Zimmermann, T

PY - 2004/10

Y1 - 2004/10

N2 - OBJECTIVE: Objective of this systematic review is to determine the level of scientific evidence for the use of Donepezil in Alzheimer's Disease. METHODS: Ten randomised controlled double-blind trials testing Donepezil versus Placebo were identified in MEDLINE and EMBASE. All ten trials were included in this systematic review. Following a detailed catalogue of criteria the methodological standard of the ten trials was assessed. RESULTS: The authors of eight trials postulated statistically significant differences in favour of Donepezil. Unfortunately, the methodological standard of all studies was insufficient. The methodological shortcomings are discussed in detail. CONCLUSION: With regard to severe methodological deficiencies the evidence for the use of Donepezil in moderate to severe Alzheimer's Disease is lacking. But even if the trials had been conducted in a methodologically correct way the clinical relevance of the postulated positive results would have to be questioned.

AB - OBJECTIVE: Objective of this systematic review is to determine the level of scientific evidence for the use of Donepezil in Alzheimer's Disease. METHODS: Ten randomised controlled double-blind trials testing Donepezil versus Placebo were identified in MEDLINE and EMBASE. All ten trials were included in this systematic review. Following a detailed catalogue of criteria the methodological standard of the ten trials was assessed. RESULTS: The authors of eight trials postulated statistically significant differences in favour of Donepezil. Unfortunately, the methodological standard of all studies was insufficient. The methodological shortcomings are discussed in detail. CONCLUSION: With regard to severe methodological deficiencies the evidence for the use of Donepezil in moderate to severe Alzheimer's Disease is lacking. But even if the trials had been conducted in a methodologically correct way the clinical relevance of the postulated positive results would have to be questioned.

KW - Aged

KW - Alzheimer Disease

KW - Cholinesterase Inhibitors

KW - Dose-Response Relationship, Drug

KW - Female

KW - Humans

KW - Indans

KW - Male

KW - Nootropic Agents

KW - Piperidines

KW - Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

KW - Research Design

U2 - 10.1055/s-2004-830077

DO - 10.1055/s-2004-830077

M3 - SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz

C2 - 15472779

VL - 72

SP - 557

EP - 563

JO - FORTSCHR NEUROL PSYC

JF - FORTSCHR NEUROL PSYC

SN - 0720-4299

IS - 10

ER -