Conraux 1988.
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods |
Allocation: not reported Design: prospective, parallel comparison |
|
| Participants |
Number: 57 randomised Age: not given Gender: not given Setting: multicentre Eligibility criteria: chronic vertigo for at least 3 months; 6 attacks in preceding 2 monthsExclusion criteria: anti‐vertigo drugs and other relevant medications Baseline characteristics: baseline group comparable for average intensity but otherwise baseline comparability unclear |
|
| Interventions | Betahistine up to 48 mg per day for 3 months versus placebo Intervention group: n = 27 Comparator group: n = 20 Use of additional interventions: none |
|
| Outcomes | Primary outcome: number of patients who improve with respect to vertigo symptoms Secondary outcomes: 5‐point ordinal scale for intensity, patient and physician global assessment | |
| Funding sources | Not given | |
| Declarations of interest | 1 co‐author affiliated to manufacturer | |
| Notes | "No difference" in adverse effects | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | "Randomised", no further information |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Method not stated |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Double‐blind, but no further information |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Double‐blind, but no further information |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | Participants lost to follow‐up: 10. Unclear which groups they belonged to. Analysis is "as treated". |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | High risk | Most outcomes not given as raw data or measures of spread missing |
| Other bias | Unclear risk | — |