Skip to main content

Table 2 GRADE evidence profile

From: Efficacy and safety of psychostimulants for amphetamine and methamphetamine use disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Quality assessment No. of patients Effect Quality Importance
# of studies Study design Risk of bias Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Other Psychostimulants Placebo Relative (95% CI) Absolute (95% CI)
Abstinence from illicit amphetamines and methamphetamines (final 2 weeks of treatment) (assessed with: urinalysis)
5 RCTs Very seriousa,b Seriousc Seriousd Very seriouse None 70/353 (19.8%) 62/289 (21.5%) OR 0.97
(0.65 to 1.45)
5 fewer per 1000
(from 64 fewer to 69 more)

Very low
Critical
Retention in treatment (end of trial) (follow-up: range 8 to 24 weeks)
14 RCTs Seriousb Serious c Very seriousd,f Seriouse None 332/626 (53.0%) 268/558 (48.0%) OR 1.20
(0.91 to 1.58)
46 more per 1000
(from 23 fewer to 113 more)

Very low
Critical
  1. CI confidence interval, OR odds ratio
  2. aThe majority of studies had high attrition bias (>50% dropout rate) and small sample sizes
  3. b80% of studies did not mention allocation concealment, which may be a source of bias
  4. cHeterogeneity was not explained by subgroup analyses, as indicated by non-significant tests for subgroup differences
  5. dStudies investigating the efficacy of different psychostimulant drugs at varying doses were pooled
  6. e95% confidence intervals are wide and there is a varying range of effect, with little overlap of confidence intervals from some studies
  7. fPopulations varied across studies with certain studies including injection drug users, incarcerated individuals, or participants with ADHD