). Nootropics act as direct or indirect agonists of dopamine receptor D1, adrenoceptor A2 or both types of receptors in the prefrontal cortex ( Spencer, Devilbiss and Berridge, 2015 ), as vasodilators increasing blood flow to the brain, or by increasing glutaminergic neurotransmission (Noor Azuin Suliman et al., 2016 ). The most common nootropics are amphetamines ( Wood et al., 2014 ) methylphenidate ( Wood et al., 2014 ) eugeroics (modafinil, armodafinil) ( Bagot, Kaminer, 2014 ) nicotine ( Heishman, Kleykamp and Singleton, 2010 ) and caffeine ( Wood et al., 2014
, 1997a; Szabo & Allwood, 2004a), a number of studies of clinical samples were undertaken involving data from the Eating Disorders Unit at Tara Hospital (Gabriel & Szabo, 2001 ; Delport & Szabo, 2008 ). The shift in focus from community based, non-clinical, samples to clinical samples reflected how the initial case descriptions followed by studies to determine possible risk for further cases had in fact seen the emergence of such cases that were now being hospitalized – and thus the subjects of clinical research. It should be emphasized that the flow of research did
Katja Koelkebeck, Maja Pantovic Stefanovic, Dorota Frydecka, Claudia Palumbo, Olivier Andlauer, Florian Riese, Nikolina Jovanovic and Mariana Pinto da Costa
facilitators towards research in psychiatry. We have included articles published in English, French and German.
Data extraction and analysis
Following the search, all potential studies were exported and duplicates removed. Titles and abstracts were screened for inclusion (MP). In cases where there was ambiguity about the relevance of the study, the full paper was obtained and reviewed. Twenty percent of abstracts were screened by a second reviewer (KK). Please see Figure 1 for a flow-chart of the papers included in this review. The content of the papers were analysed
is summarized in detail in the Appendix 1 ( Shamseer et al. 2015 ). A systematic review in Medline/Pubmed (–1.12.2017) was conducted with the following search strategy limited to human studies: polypharmacy AND antidepressants. In addition, references from meta-analyses on this topic were checked. Congress abstracts were not included if they were not published as regular articles in Medline/Pubmed. A literature search protocol is presented as a flow chart ( Figure 1 ). A filter for RCTs and clinical trials was applied when searching in Medline/Pubmed.
Bangladesh, methods of suicide in the country, prominent risk factors of suicide, existing suicide prevention activities, assessment of media activity influencing the suicidality of people of Bangladesh and possible bias based on the PRISMA guideline by the author himself ( Fig. 1 ). Biases were evaluated based on the Cochrane criteria ( Higgins et al. 2017 ).
Flow chart of article search and selection process
Outcome of the systematic search
A total of 1057 articles were identified from the systematic search using the above
and dissertations on MBI and ADHD were also closely scrutinized. The process of article selection is illustrated in Figure 1 .
PRISMA Flow Diagram (adapted from Moher et al., 2009 )
Quality appraisal methods
The quality of the studies included was assessed using a bespoke quality appraisal method tool, ‘Quality Indicators for Group Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Research in Special Education’ ( Gersten et al., 2005 ). Moreover, elements from the Cochrane EPOC checklist were added to the quality criteria (Greenhalgh, et al., 2005). The
not set. This decision was made based on the relatively young nature of research in the area, and because of the lack of reviews combining gay and lesbian youth, and self-concept and social context.
All searches and initial selection of articles were conducted by FH with NF also reviewing the inclusion/exclusion criteria for selected abstracts. Agreement on articles retained was 100%. The process of article selection is illustrated in Figure 1 . This systematic review was conducted without financial or other support.
PRISMA flow diagram of the