Pharmacological intervention and a form of psychotherapy (combination) vs pharmacological intervention and usual care or attention control (single): Gastrointestinal adverse events
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Pharmacological intervention and psychological therapy (combination) vs a pharmacological intervention and usual care or attention control (single) Adverse events: all ‐ gastrointestinal effects (e.g. constipation, diarrhoea) (secondary outcome) · people with depression after stroke Pharmacological, non‐invasive brain stimulation and psychological interventions, and their combination, for… (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 54 participants | GRADE not reported |
Pharmacological intervention and a form of psychotherapy (combination) vs pharmacological intervention and usual care or attention control (single) Adverse events: all ‐ gastrointestinal effects (e.g. constipation, diarrhoea) (Analysis 4.8) · people with depression after stroke The review found no eligible studies for this question. Pharmacological, non‐invasive brain stimulation and psychological interventions, and their combination, for… (2020) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD003437.PUB4, superseded | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pharmacological, non‐invasive brain stimulation and psychological interventions, and their combination, for treating depression after stroke 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.