SynthesisAge and ageing2025
Persistence with anti-dementia medications: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Age and ageing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Persistence with antidementia therapy in Germany: A retrospective cohort study of 567,815 patients.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSuboptimal persistence with anti-dementia drugs (ADDs) in patients with dementia is associated with poorer clinical outcomes, including accelerated disease progression, cognitive decline and increased healthcare utilisation. This study aimed to systematically review real-world persistence rates with ADDs and identify factors influencing persistence.
methodsWe followed the Cochrane methodology and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL from 1 January 1995 to 5 February 2024. Pooled persistence rates were calculated using random-effects Mantel-Haenszel models. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics, publication bias via funnel plots and Egger's/Begg's tests, and moderators were explored through meta-regression.
resultsWe included 68 studies involving 684,493 participants aged 50 years and older who received ADD. The mean 12-month persistence rate was 49% (95% CI: 42%-56%). Subgroup analyses revealed higher persistence for studies where a permissible gap for medicine refills was not required based on the methodology (67%, 95% CI: 38%-90%), those examining memantine (61%, 95% CI: 38%-82%), studies published between 2011 and 2015 (54%, 95% CI: 41%-68%) and studies conducted in Europe (57%, 95% CI: 43%-71%). Of these, the permissible gap remained an independent predictor of between-study heterogeneity in persistence (β = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.18-0.54).
conclusionThe meta-analysis demonstrated relatively low persistence to ADDs, which varied according to the evaluation criteria used. Targeted interventions to improve persistence with therapy may lead to better outcomes in patients with dementia. Also, a standardised framework for measuring persistence could improve research reliability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.