ArticleClinical and experimental nephrology2020
Correction to: Dotinurad: a novel selective urate reabsorption inhibitor as a future therapeutic option for hyperuricemia.
Article in Clinical and experimental nephrology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A κ-OR Agonist Protects the Endothelial Function Impaired by Hyperuricemia Through Regulating the Akt/eNOS Signal Pathway.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2022Article
- Review of Urate-Lowering Therapeutics: From the Past to the Future.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum for
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the original publication of the article the presentation of Table 1 was incorrectly published.
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.