ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2018
Meta-analysis of the benefit of sitagliptin treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes complicated with incipient nephropathy.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2018. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pathogenic Pathways and Therapeutic Approaches Targeting Inflammation in Diabetic Nephropathy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the evidence of the clinical efficacy and safety of sitagliptin in diabetic patients with incipient nephropathy. PubMed, Ovid, Cochrane library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases were searched in September 2017 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of sitagliptin in diabetic patients with incipient nephropathy. Study selection, data extraction and study quality assessment were performed independently by two investigators, while disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer. The treatment effect was estimated by calculating the mean difference (MD) or standard mean difference (SMD). Heterogeneity was assessed with the χ
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.