Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21897706›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeutics2011

Rabeprazole and esomeprazole in mild-to-moderate erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease: A comparative study of efficacy and safety.

Rituparna Maiti, Jyothirmai Jaida, P L John Israel, Narendar Koyagura, Sruthi Mukkisa, Anuradha Palani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmacology & pharmacotherapeutics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rituparna MaitiDepartment of Pharmacology, Prathima Institute of Medical Sciences, Nagunur Road, Karimnagar, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Jyothirmai Jaida
P L John Israel
Narendar Koyagura
Sruthi Mukkisa
Anuradha Palani
Institute of Medical Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of rabeprazole and esomeprazole in mild-to-moderate erosive gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). MATERIALS AND

methodsA randomized, single-blinded, outdoor-based clinical study was conducted on 60 patients of mild-to-moderate erosive GERD. After baseline clinical assessment and investigations, rabeprazole (40 mg) was prescribed to 30 patients and esomeprazole (40 mg) to another 30 patients for 4 weeks. The efficacy variables were change in GERD symptom scoring, endoscopic findings, and Quality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia (QOLRAD) scoring over 4 weeks.

resultHeartburn, acid regurgitation, and overall GERD symptom scoring (P = 0.01) were significantly decreased with rabeprazole in comparison to esomeprazole. The comparative study of all five domains of the QOLARD questionnaire including overall scoring revealed a statistically significant improvement in the rabeprazole group. Endoscopic findings in the rabeprazole group showed an absolute improvement of 30% and relative improvement of 55% over esomeprazole. Both the drugs were well tolerated having no significant difference in the incidence of adverse effects.

conclusionRabeprazole (40 mg) is a better choice for mild-to-moderate GERD compared with esomeprazole (40 mg) because of its better efficacy and safety profile.

Indexed as

esomeprazoleGastroesophageal reflux diseasegastroesophageal reflux disease symptom scoringQuality of Life in Reflux and Dyspepsia scoringrabeprazole

Identifiers

PMID21897706
PMCPMC3157122
OpenAlexW1988720965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.