Intranasal oxytocin for alcohol use disorder: A systematic review and multilevel, bayesian, and variance meta-analyses of randomized clinical trial data.

چکیده اصلی

BACKGROUND: Intranasal oxytocin (OT) has been proposed as a promising adjunctive treatment for Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD), yet randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have yielded mixed and inconclusive findings. To clarify its therapeutic potential, we conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis using frequentist, Bayesian, and variability-based approaches. METHODS: We performed a multilevel random-effects meta-analysis of six eligible RCTs comparing intranasal OT with placebo for alcohol-related outcomes. Hedges' g values were calculated and winsorised at |g| = 3 to limit leverage from extreme small-sample effects. Moderator analyses assessed outcome domain, OT dose, treatment duration, year of publication, administration frequency, and clinical setting. Publication bias was evaluated using multilevel PET-PEESE with cluster-robust correction, Egger's test, trim-and-fill, and limit meta-analysis. Bayesian multilevel models examined average treatment effects and outcome variability. RESULTS: The overall pooled effect was not statistically significant (Hedges' g = 0.34, 95% CI -0.48-1.17, p = 0.47), with substantial between-study heterogeneity (Q(48) = 504.40, p < .001). Cook's distance identified Pedersen et al. (2013) as statistically influential; moderator and publication bias analyses were conducted on the remaining five studies. No significant moderation was observed by outcome domain, dose, duration, frequency, or setting. Year of publication showed a nominally significant positive association with effect size in the restricted sample (β = 0.184, p = .042). Multiple publication bias diagnostics converged on the absence of a systematic adjusted effect. Bayesian multilevel analysis confirmed the absence of a credible treatment effect (posterior mean μ = -0.005, 95% CrI -0.53-0.52). Robust Bayesian meta-analysis provided moderate support for the null hypothesis (BF₀₁ = 4.74). Variability analyses found no evidence that OT increased outcome dispersion relative to placebo (lnVR = -0.146, p = .153 after robust correction), providing no support for latent responder subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to early expectations, intranasal OT does not confer a consistent therapeutic benefit across alcohol-related outcomes. The lack of evidence for publication bias or increased outcome variability argues against latent differential responsiveness driving effects. Nonetheless, context-sensitive signals - particularly in domains related to social-cognitive processing - underscore the need for mechanistically informed trials. Future research should prioritise precision frameworks to clarify when, for whom, and under what conditions OT may yield meaningful clinical benefit.

متن کامل اصلی