ArticleMedicine2019
Effectiveness of tenofovir and entecavir in nucleos(t)ide analogue-naive chronic hepatitis B: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2019. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic hepatitis b (CHB) is a serious problem worldwide. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) both are first-line drugs for CHB, but there is debate about which is more appropriate in nucleos(t)ide analogue-naive CHB.
objectiveTo systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of tenofovir and ETV in nucleos(t)ide analogue-naive CHB.
methodsThe Web of Science, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Clinical Trials, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases will be electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials regarding the comparison between tenofovir and ETV in nucleos(t)ide analogue-naive CHB since the date of database inception to July 2019. Two researchers independently screened and evaluated the obtained studies and extracted the outcome indexes. RevMan 5.3 software will be used for the meta-analysis.
resultWe will provide practical and targeted results assessing the effectiveness and safety of TDF and ETV for nucleos(t)ide analogue-naive CHB patients, try to compare the advantages of TDF and ETV.
conclusionThe stronger evidence about the effectiveness and safety of TDF and ETV for nucleos(t)ide analogue-naive CHB patients will be provided for clinicians. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42019134194.
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.