Are selective COX 2 inhibitors superior to traditional NSAIDs? Pharmacia's response to editorial.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. An economic model of long-term use of celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis.BMC gastroenterology · 2007
   Article
2. Safety profile of celecoxib as used in general practice in England: results of a prescription-event monitoring study.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2004
   Article
3. Do some inhibitors of COX-2 increase the risk of thromboembolic events?: Linking pharmacology with pharmacoepidemiology.Drug safety · 2004
   Review
4. Outcome trials of COX-2 selective inhibitors: global safety evaluation does not promise benefits.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2003
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Are selective COX 2 inhibitors superior to traditional non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs?2002

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as