Abbreviations used in table: GAD, generalised anxiety disorder; OCD, obsessive-compulsive disorder; PTSD, post-traumatic stress disorder; QoL, quality of life; RCTs, randomised controlled trials. Studies not meeting the prespecified inclusion criteria (Table 9) were excluded: studies specifying an age range as an inclusion criterion and in which the upper age limit was 65 years were excluded. Studies were also excluded if they were: trials reporting only post-crossover results and pre-crossover results could not be obtained; case reports, historical articles, narrative reviews, editorials, and opinion pieces; reports published as only meeting abstracts, and where insufficient methodological details were reported to allow critical appraisal of study quality. Where it was not possible to determine the age of the included population (e.g., baseline characteristics not reported), authors were contacted with a request for additional information. No additional information was provided within the allotted period of time. Planned data abstraction, critical appraisal, subgroup analyses and evidence synthesis procedures are documented in the review protocol (Appendix 4). Results of the review of clinical effectiveness evidence No study, either RCT or observational, meeting the prespecified inclusion criteria (Table 9) was identified. The search of clinical trial registries identified no ongoing or planned RCTs in older adults with a treatment-resistant anxiety disorder. The emergence of systematic reviews evaluating the clinical effectiveness of pharmacological and psychological treatments for anxiety in older adults highlights the increasing awareness of the need to manage this condition. Quantity and quality of research available The searches retrieved a total of 3,644 records (post deduplication) that were of possible relevance to the review (Figure 1). These were screened and 109 full references were ordered. Of the full references evaluated, the full publication of only one study was not obtained. No study met the prespecified inclusion criteria outlined in Table 9. The full list of studies screened and subsequently excluded (with reasons for exclusion) from the review is presented in Appendix 5. Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram for studies included and excluded from the clinical effectiveness review
Abbreviations used in table: GAD, generalised anxiety disorder; OCD, obsessive-compulsive disorder; PTSD, post-traumatic stress disorder; QoL, quality of life; RCTs, randomised controlled trials. Studies not meeting the prespecified inclusion criteria (Table 9) were excluded: studies specifying an age range as an inclusion criterion and in which the upper age limit was 65 years were excluded. Studies were also excluded if they were: trials reporting only post-crossover results and pre-crossover results could not be obtained; case reports, historical articles, narrative reviews, editorials, and opinion pieces; reports published as only meeting abstracts, and where insufficient methodological details were reported to allow critical appraisal of study quality. Where it was not possible to determine the age of the included population (e.g., baseline characteristics not reported), authors were contacted with a request for additional information. No additional information was provided within the allotted period of time. Planned data abstraction, critical appraisal, subgroup analyses and evidence synthesis procedures are documented in the review protocol (Appendix 4). Results of the review of clinical effectiveness evidence No study, either RCT or observational, meeting the prespecified inclusion criteria (Table 9) was identified. The search of clinical trial registries identified no ongoing or planned RCTs in older adults with a treatment-resistant anxiety disorder. The emergence of systematic reviews evaluating the clinical effectiveness of pharmacological and psychological treatments for anxiety in older adults highlights the increasing awareness of the need to manage this condition. Quantity and quality of research available The searches retrieved a total of 3,644 records (post deduplication) that were of possible relevance to the review (Figure 1). These were screened and 109 full references were ordered. Of the full references evaluated, the full publication of only one study was not obtained. No study met the prespecified inclusion criteria outlined in Table 9. The full list of studies screened and subsequently excluded (with reasons for exclusion) from the review is presented in Appendix 5. Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram for studies included and excluded from the clinical effectiveness review
Project%252013-39_BMJ-TAG%2520short%2520report_28%252003%252014_revised.docx