SynthesisPloS one2014
E-selectin gene polymorphisms and essential hypertension in Asian population: an updated meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEpidemiological studies have shown that E-selectin gene polymorphisms (A561C and C1839T) may be associated with essential hypertension (EH), but the results are conflicting in different ethnic populations. Thus, we performed this meta-analysis to investigate a more authentic association between E-selectin gene polymorphisms and the risk of EH.
methodsWe searched the relevant studies for the present meta-analysis from the following electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Wanfang Data, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to evaluate the strength of the association between E-selectin gene polymorphisms and EH susceptibility. The pooled ORs were performed for dominant model, allelic model and recessive model. The publication bias was examined by Begg's funnel plots and Egger's test.
resultsA total of eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies came from Asians. Ten studies (12 cohorts) evaluated the A561C polymorphism and EH risk, including 2,813 cases and 2,817 controls. The pooled OR was 2.280 (95%CI: 1.893-2.748, P<0.001) in dominant model, 5.284 (95%CI: 2.679-10.420, P<0.001) in recessive model and 2.359 (95%CI: 1.981-2.808, P = 0.001) in allelic model. Four studies (six cohorts) evaluated C1839T polymorphism and EH risk, including 1,700 cases and 1,681 controls. The pooled OR was 0.785 (95%CI: 0.627-0.983, P = 0.035) in dominant model, 1.250 (95%CI: 0.336-4.652, P = 0.739) in recessive model and 0.805 (95%CI: 0.649-0.999, P = 0.049) in allelic model.
conclusionThe current meta-analysis concludes that the C allele of E-selectin A561C gene polymorphism might increase the EH risk in Asian population, whereas the T allele of E-selectin C1839T gene polymorphism might decrease the EH risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.