SynthesisBMJ clinical evidence2007
Colonic diverticular disease.
Synthesis in BMJ clinical evidence, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
- Impaired Expression of Neuregulin 1 and Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor β4 Subunit in Diverticular Disease.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2019Article
- Diverticulosis today: unfashionable and still under-researched.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2016Review
- Diverticular disease: changing epidemiology and management.Drugs & aging · 2015Review
- Recent advances in the treatment of colonic diverticular disease and prevention of acute diverticulitis.Annals of gastroenterologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDiverticula (mucosal outpouching through the wall of the colon) affect over 5% of adults aged 40 years and older, but only 10-25% of affected people will develop symptoms such as lower abdominal pain. Recurrent symptoms are common, and 5% of people with diverticula eventually develop complications such as perforation, obstruction, haemorrhage, fistulae, or abscesses. METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of: treatments for uncomplicated diverticular disease; treatments to prevent complications; and treatments for acute diverticulitis? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to July 2006 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
resultsWe found 13 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
conclusionsIn this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antispasmodics, bran, elective surgery, increasing fibre intake, ispaghula husk, lactulose, medical treatment, mesalazine, methylcellulose, rifaximin, surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19454119PMC2943810What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.