Rapid guidelines - timely and important guidance needed for setting standards and best practices.

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.

1. Collaborative large language models (LLMs) are all you need for screening in systematic reviews.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026
   Article
2. Social media analytics in nutrition research: a rapid review of current usage in investigation of dietary behaviours.Public health nutrition · 2021
   Review
3. Treating patients with multiple sclerosis during the COVID-19 pandemic: Assessing the expert recommendations.Multiple sclerosis and related disorders · 2020
   Article
4. [Cochrane Rapid Review: the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2019
   Review

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as