Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32185665›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2020

Marijuana, Ondansetron, and Promethazine Are Perceived as Most Effective Treatments for Gastrointestinal Nausea.

Thomas A Zikos, Linda Nguyen, Afrin Kamal, Nielsen Fernandez-Becker, Kirsten Regalia, Monica Nandwani, Irene Sonu, Mildred Garcia, Philip Okafor, Leila Neshatian and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Thomas A ZikosDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA. zikosta@stanford.edu.
Linda NguyenDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
Afrin KamalDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
Nielsen Fernandez-BeckerDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
Kirsten RegaliaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
Monica NandwaniDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
Irene SonuDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
Mildred GarciaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
Philip OkaforDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
Leila NeshatianDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
Damanpreet GrewalDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
Patricia GarciaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
George TriadafilopoulosDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
John O ClarkeDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 430 Broadway St., Pavilion C, 3rd Floor, GI Suite, Redwood City, CA, 94063, USA.
Stanford University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany anti-nausea treatments are available for chronic gastrointestinal syndromes, but data on efficacy and comparative effectiveness are sparse.

aimsTo conduct a sectional survey study of patients with chronic nausea to assess comparative effectiveness of commonly used anti-nausea treatments.

methodsOutpatients at a single center presenting for gastroenterology evaluation were asked to rate anti-nausea efficacy on a scale of 0 (no efficacy) to 5 (very effective) of 29 commonly used anti-nausea treatments and provide other information about their symptoms. Additional information was collected from the patients' chart. The primary outcome was to determine which treatments were better or worse than average using a t test. The secondary outcome was to assess differential response by individual patient characteristics using multiple linear regression.

resultsOne hundred and fifty-three patients completed the survey. The mean efficacy score of all anti-nausea treatments evaluated was 1.73. After adjustment, three treatments had scores statically higher than the mean, including marijuana (2.75, p < 0.0001), ondansetron (2.64, p < 0.0001), and promethazine (2.46, p < 0.0001). Several treatments, including many neuromodulators, complementary and alternative treatments, erythromycin, and diphenhydramine had scores statistically below average. Patients with more severe nausea responded better to marijuana (p = 0.036) and diphenhydramine (p < 0.001) and less so to metoclopramide (p = 0.020). There was otherwise no significant differential response by age, gender, nausea localization, underlying gastrointestinal cause of nausea, and GCSI.

conclusionsWhen treating nausea in patients with chronic gastrointestinal syndromes, clinicians may consider trying higher performing treatments first, and forgoing lower performing treatments. Further prospective research is needed, particularly with respect to highly effective treatments.

Indexed as

CannabisAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntiemeticsChronic DiseaseComparative Effectiveness ResearchFemaleHistamine H1 AntagonistsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNauseaOndansetronPromethazineAntiemeticsHistamine H1 AntagonistsOndansetronPromethazineAlternative medicineCannabinoidsFunctional gastrointestinal disordersGastroparesisNausea

Identifiers

PMID32185665
OpenAlexW3011060479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.