ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015
Classification of non-allergic rhinitis based on inflammatory characteristics.
Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Non-allergic rhinitis in children: Epidemiological aspects, pathological features, diagnostic methodology and clinical management.World journal of methodology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study aims to investigate nasal and lower airway inflammation in patients with non-allergic rhinitis (NAR), and to discuss a method of NAR classification based on inflammatory characteristics and its clinical significance. A total of 117 NAR patients admitted to our hospital from June 2010 to June 2011 were enrolled in this study, 162 healthy participants were employed as healthy controls. Nasal and lower airway inflammation were evaluated using the skin prick test, nasal and pulmonary visual analogue scale scoring, cell blood count, nasal douche, induced sputum assay, nasal provocation test, and bronchial provocation test. Compared to the healthy controls, NAR patients have significant higher levels of nasal douche eosinophils, more induced sputum eosinophils as well as blood eosinophils, and higher rates of nasal and bronchial provocation. Patient with high level of eosinophil in nasal douch tended to be with higher concentrations of eosinophils in induced sputum. Scores on the nasal and bronchial provocation tests are also correlated to each other. Among all NAR patients, 28 cases (23.9%) were with no abnormality detectable by eosinophil measurement or a provocation test, 39 cases (33.3%) were with elevated levels of eosinophils, and 50 cases (42.7%) exhibited a nasal provocation response. Based on this, all studied NAR cases were classified into 3 groups: non-specific type (group A, 28/117), increased eosinophil type (group B, 39/117), and hyper-reactive type (group C, 50/117). Some NAR cases may be considered as systemic inflammatory disease characterized by increased nasal eosinophil and nasal hyperreactivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26770343PMC4694243What 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.