Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23667753›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurogastroenterology and motility2013

A randomized, double blinded, clinical trial to assess the efficacy and cost effectiveness of omeprazole compared to rabeprazole in the maintenance therapy of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Jung Ho Park, Hyojin Park, Dong Ho Lee, In Kyung Sung

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jung Ho ParkDepartment of Internal Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Hyojin Park
Dong Ho Lee
In Kyung Sung
Dankook University · KRNew Generation University College · ETSungkyunkwan University · KRYonsei University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsThe aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and cost efficiency of omeprazole 10 mg and rabeprazole 10 mg once daily for 24 weeks in the maintenance therapy.

methodsThis was a randomized, open-label study enrolling 279 patients with erosive esophagitis A or B (Los Angeles classification) and typical gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms. Patients who showed complete endoscopic and symptomatic healing after 8 weeks of proton pump inhibitor treatment were randomly allocated to maintenance treatment with omeprazole 10 mg once daily or rabeprazole 10 mg once daily for 42 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with symptomatic remission at 42 weeks.

resultsAt the end of 42 weeks of maintenance therapy, 96.4% of omeprazole and 95.1% of rabeprazole treated patients remained symptom free (P > 0.05). Two drugs were also comparable with regard to the severity and frequency of reflux symptoms during the maintenance phase (P > 0.05). By the cost-minimization analysis, the mean total costs per patient for remaining symptom-free for 6 months were 241,775 won for omeprazole and 287,115 won for rabeprazole, respectively.

conclusionsOmeprazole 10 mg appeared to have similar efficacy in maintaining symptomatic remission as rabeprazole 10 mg, but was superior to rabeprazole 10 mg in terms of cost efficiency in the maintenance therapy of gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms.

Indexed as

Cost-benefit analysisGastroesophageal refluxMaintenance

Identifiers

PMID23667753
PMCPMC3644658
OpenAlexW2125443893

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.