Response to: Comment on "Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio: Novel Markers for Diagnosis and Prognosis in Patients with Idiopathic Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss".

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.

1. [Multifactorial analysis of the degree of hearing loss and outcome in patients with sudden hearing loss].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2022
   Article
2. Assessment of inflammatory markers in otosclerosis patients.Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio: novel markers for diagnosis and prognosis in patients with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss.2014
• Comment on
  Comment on "Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio: novel markers for diagnosis and prognosis in patients with idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss".2015

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as