Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21735425›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2011

Intranasal ipratropium bromide for the common cold.

Zaina H Albalawi, Sahar S Othman, Khalid Alfaleh

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Intranasal ipratropium bromide for the common cold.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  2. Neonatal rhinorrhea, heart rate variability, and childhood exercise-induced wheeze.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2023
    Article
  3. Prevention and treatment of the common cold: making sense of the evidence.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2014
    Review
  4. Complementary and integrative treatments: upper respiratory infection.Otolaryngologic clinics of North America · 2013
    Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zaina H AlbalawiSheikh Abdullah S. Bahamdan Research Chair for Evidence-Based Health Care and Knowledge Translation, College of Medicine, King Saud University, P.O. Box 68639, Riyadh, Central, Saudi Arabia, 11537.
Sahar S Othman
Khalid Alfaleh
King Saud University · SAKing Abdulaziz University · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe common cold is one of the most common illnesses in humans and constitutes an economic burden both in terms of productivity and expenditure for treatment. There is no proven cure for the common cold and symptomatic relief is the mainstay of treatment. The use of intranasal ipratropium bromide (IB) has been addressed in several studies and might prove an effective treatment for the common cold.

objectivesTo determine the effect of IB versus placebo or no treatment on severity of rhinorrhoea and nasal congestion in children and adults with the common cold. Subjective overall improvement was another primary outcome and side effects were reported as a secondary outcome. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2011, Issue 1) which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1950 to January week 4, 2011), MEDLINE in-process and other non-indexed citations (February 2011), EMBASE (1974 to February 2011), AMED (1985 to February 2011), Biosis (1974 to February 2011) and LILACS (1985 to February 2011). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IB to placebo or no treatment in children and adults with the common cold. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We used a standardised form to extract relevant data and we contacted trial authors for additional information. MAIN

resultsSeven trials with a total of 2144 participants were included. Four studies (1959 participants) addressed subjective change in severity of rhinorrhoea. All studies were consistent in reporting statistically significant changes in favour of IB. Nasal congestion was reported in four studies and was found to have no significant change between the two groups. Two studies found a positive response in the IB group for the global assessment of overall improvement. Side effects were more frequent in the IB group, odds ratio (OR) 2.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.40 to 3.11). Commonly encountered side effects included nasal dryness, blood tinged mucus and epistaxis. AUTHORS'

conclusionsFor people with the common cold, the existing evidence, which has some limitations, suggests that IB is likely to be effective in ameliorating rhinorrhoea. IB had no effect on nasal congestion and its use was associated with more side effects compared to placebo or no treatment although these appeared to be well-tolerated and self-limiting. There is a need for larger, high-quality trials to determine the effectiveness of IB in relieving common cold symptoms.

Indexed as

Administration, IntranasalCommon ColdHumansIpratropiumNasal DecongestantsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicIpratropiumNasal Decongestants

Identifiers

PMID21735425
OpenAlexW4236154037

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.