ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2018
Correlation between Quantitative
Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differential apoptosis of GES-1 cells induced by Helicobacter pylori with heteroresistance to clarithromycin.Archives of microbiology · 2026Article
- Accuracy and Agreement of a 45 mg Versus a 75 mgDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Real-World Evidence on Different Amoxicillin-Containing Regimens forAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Confirmation of Helicobacter pylori eradication using ¹³C urea breath test: addressing the regional post-treatment outcomes.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Quantitative ¹³C-urea breath test values predict peptic ulcer risk inFrontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Testing forJournal of clinical microbiology · 2024Review
- Factors Affecting the Intraluminal Therapy forMicroorganisms · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are continual efforts to identify factors which influence the success of first-line therapy for
methodsAdult patients who underwent a first-time
resultsA total of 94,590 subjects (36.1% male, age 28.5 ± 6.0 years) who underwent a first-time C13-UBT during the study period were included. C13-UBT was positive in 48,509 (51.3%) subjects. A confirmatory posttreatment C13-UBT was performed in 18,375 (37.8%), and eradication was successful in 12,018 (65.4%). The mean C13-UBT recording was 20.6 ± 16.2 DOB in subjects with successful eradication and 19.5 ± 13.1 DOB in subjects with treatment failure (OR, 1.01; 95% CI 1.00-1.01,
conclusionsThe superiority in
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.