2013
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd009084.pub2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pharmacological interventions for self-injurious behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Evidence of naltrexone efficacy in SIB in the heterogeneous population of intellectually disabled adults is limited with few double-blind placebo-controlled studies. As a result of limited data, for example, a recent Cochrane Review concluded that recommendations could not be made for use of naltrexone for SIB in intellectual disability (1). Notably, three of the albeit small studies suggested clinical benefits.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Evidence of naltrexone efficacy in SIB in the heterogeneous population of intellectually disabled adults is limited with few double-blind placebo-controlled studies. As a result of limited data, for example, a recent Cochrane Review concluded that recommendations could not be made for use of naltrexone for SIB in intellectual disability (1). Notably, three of the albeit small studies suggested clinical benefits.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Notably, three of the albeit small studies suggested clinical benefits. Safety, efficacy, dosing, and population variability in the use of naltrexone for SIB in intellectual disability requires further empirical study (1).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two reviews contained studies with quasiexperimental methods [63,64]. Two reviews in this group did not conduct quantitative synthesis of estimates [61,62], whereas one review meta-analyzed the data for only one outcome, involving two trials [68].…”
Section: Description Of Included Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…None of the reviews that did not adopt GRADE gave a reason for that decision. In comparison with GRADEendorsed reviews, a higher proportion of those not endorsing GRADE in both complex and simple intervention review groups reported either the narrative synthesis of the data [42,50,51,61,62] or the quantitative synthesis applied to only part of the included outcomes [8,35,43,44,47e49,68].…”
Section: Grade Ratings For Separate Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation