ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2017
Treatment for bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw.
Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of Chinese patent medicines for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis in China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Role of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Bone Regeneration and Osteoporosis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- Maackiain dampens osteoclastogenesis via attenuating RANKL-stimulated NF-κB signalling pathway and NFATc1 activity.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2020Article
- Therapeutic Anabolic and Anticatabolic Benefits of Natural Chinese Medicines for the Treatment of Osteoporosis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Data sourcesCochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, CancerLit, CINAHL, AMED, clinicaltrials.gov and the WHO International Trial Registry Platform. The reviewers searched six grey literature sites and contacted authors, researchers and pharmaceutical companies.Study selectionRandomised controlled trials for the treatment of BRONJ comparing interventions with other treatment or placebo were included in any setting with no age restriction.Data extraction and synthesisIndependently, two reviewers selected studies for inclusion, risk of bias and data extraction. The main outcome was healing. Secondary outcomes were pain improvement and quality of life.ResultsOne RCT with 49 patients met the inclusion criteria comparing the addition of hyperbaric oxygen therapy to standard of care alone. Changes in the lesion size and number were assessed at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months. Pain was assessed weekly while quality of life was assessed at baseline and six months. Improvement, as measured by the decrease in the size or number of lesions, achieved a RR 1.94, CI 95% (1.01 to 3.74) at three months. No other measure of this outcome was statistically significant. Pain changes and quality of life could not be numerically analysed.ConclusionsThe authors concluded that there is insufficient evidence to support a particular regimen for the treatment of BRONJ.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28642568What 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.