SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2025
Comparison of the effects of choline alphoscerate and citicoline in patients with dementia disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Choline Alfoscerate in the Treatment of Subthreshold Depression in the Elderly: A Pilot Study (CARTESIO).Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Effect of choline supplementation in presymptomaticAlzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Over 44 million people worldwide live with dementia, affecting their quality of life and well-being. Choline alphoscerate and citicoline supplements are commonly used to improve cognitive function in dementia patients. However, their efficacy remains inconsistent. Objective: This systematic review aimed to investigate and compare the effects of choline alphoscerate and citicoline on cognitive impairments, behavioural symptoms, and other clinical conditions in patients with dementia disorders. Methods: PubMed and Scopus were searched to identify relevant studies. We calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) or standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI for binary outcomes. Results: This review included data from 358 participants across three randomized controlled trials (RCTs). As measured by the Sandoz Clinical Assessment for Geriatric Patients (SCAG), choline alphoscerate significantly improved clinical conditions in patients with dementia disorders compared with citicoline at the end of treatment [WMD: -3.92 (95% CI: -7.41 to -0.42)]. Specifically, our pooled analysis revealed that choline alphoscerate showed significant improvements in cognitive function, interpersonal relationships, affective disorders, apathy, and somatic functioning compared to citicoline at the end of treatment, as measured by the SCAG. However, there was no significant difference between the choline alphoscerate and citicoline treatment groups on memory or word fluency tests (WFT). Dropout rates for choline alphoscerate and citicoline were 9.4 and 6.7%, respectively [OR: 1.44 (95% CI: 0.66 to 3.13)], indicating no significant differences in acceptability. Conclusion: Our findings indicate that choline alphoscerate is more effective than citicoline in improving the clinical conditions of dementia patients. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024626782, Identifier: CRD42024626782.
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.