ArticleAllergy & rhinology (Providence, R.I.)
Effect of
Article in Allergy & rhinology (Providence, R.I.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Effects ofIndian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2021Article
- Nigella Plants - Traditional Uses, Bioactive Phytoconstituents, Preclinical and Clinical Studies.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
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
backgroundChronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a common inflammatory disease of nasal and paranasal sinuses, with many treatment methods available for the management of this disease. Recently, herbal medicines have shown a significant impact on inflammatory diseases such as CRS, and one of these herbal medicines is
methodsIn this randomized clinical trial, 65 patients with mild to moderate CRSsNP were enrolled based on the inclusion criteria. Patients were divided randomly into 2 parallel groups: intervention and placebo groups. Patients in the intervention group received 2 puffs/day of
resultsThirty-one patients (19 men and 12 women) in the intervention group and 34 in the placebo group (18 men and 16 women) were evaluated. Lund-McKay, Lund Kennedy, and Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 scores were assessed for both groups after 8 weeks of treatments. These scores decreased significantly in both groups. However, these scores were significantly lower in the intervention group compared with the placebo group (
conclusionThe use of
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.