Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25241537›Full record

ArticleHua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology2014

[Analysis of the infection status of saliva Helicobacter pylori in Lanzhou].

Rui Guo, Tuanjie Che, Jun Ju, Sen Yang, Xiangyi He, Ying Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Site-stratified global oralJournal of oral microbiology · 2026
    Review
  2. [Relationship between oral and gut microbes].Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2017
    Article
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.

Rui Guo
Tuanjie Che
Jun Ju
Sen Yang
Xiangyi He
Ying Zhang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the prevalence of saliva Helicobacter pylori in Lanzhou and investigate Helicobacter pylori-related diseases.

methodsHelicobacter pylori was detected through bacterial culture, Gram stain microscopy, and urease test from saliva samples collected from 941 residents of Lanzhou. The infection rate and growth of Helicobacter pylori among the residents were analyzed in terms of different oral health conditions, oral disease, gender, urban and rural status, and age.

resultsThe rate of Helicobacter pylori-positive saliva in Lanzhou was 42.72%. The status of Helicobacter pylori infection showed significant difference among subjects with different oral hygiene and oral diseases. The rate of Helicobacter pylori-positive saliva among females was 47.89%, which was greater compared with the rate among males (38.45%, P = 0.004, chi2 = 8.492). The rate of Helicobacter pylori-positive saliva in the town was 33.99%, which was less than the rate for the villages (50.93%, P = 0.000, chi2 = 27.551). The rate of Helicobacter pylori-positive saliva among residents aged 10 to 59 showed a flat trend with no significant differences. However, the rate of Helicobacter pylori-positive saliva among residents over 60 years old showed a significant increase. No significant difference was found in the growth of saliva Helicobacter pylori (P = 0.086).

conclusionThe rate of Helicobacter pylori-positive saliva is related to the subjects' oral hygiene, oral disease, gender, age, and living conditions.

Indexed as

Helicobacter pyloriSalivaAdolescentAdultChildChinaFemaleHelicobacter InfectionsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID25241537
PMCPMC7041068

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.