ReviewFrontiers of medicine2014
Current hepatitis B treatment guidelines and future research directions.
Review in Frontiers of medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Future Therapy for Hepatitis B Virus: Role of Immunomodulators.Current hepatology reports · 2016Review
- The regulatory role of activating transcription factor 2 in inflammation.Mediators of inflammation · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection causes a tremendous clinical burden across the world with more than half a million people dying annually from HBV related disease. Significant advances have been made in HBV treatment in the past decade and several guidelines have been published by professional societies and expert panels. Although these recommendations have been valuable to help optimize HBV treatment, there is discordance in treatment criteria and many patients infected with HBV may fall outside of these recommendations. This paper systematically reviews the natural history of the disease and compares and contrasts the recommendations for initiation of treatment from the various societies. There is also discussion of special groups that require particular consideration and some of the open research questions and future research directions within the field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24871443What 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.