ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2020
Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a ready-to-drink bowel preparation in overweight and obese adults: subanalysis by body mass index from a phase III, assessor-blinded study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03017235 (A Randomized, Assessor-Blinded, Multi-Center Study Investigating the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Sodium Picosulfate, Magnesium Oxide and Anhydrous Citric Acid Oral Solution Versus Sodium Picosulfate, Magnesium Oxide and Anhydrous Citric Acid Powder for Oral Solution), which is not on this 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.
A Randomized, Assessor-Blinded, Multi-Center Study Investigating the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Sodium Picosulfate, Magnesium Oxide and Anhydrous Citric Acid Oral Solution Versus Sodium Picosulfate, Magnesium Oxide and Anhydrous Citric Acid Powder for Oral Solution (PREPOPIK®) for Colon Cleansing in Preparation for Colonoscopy
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- 3 L split-dose polyethylene glycol is superior to 2 L polyethylene glycol in colonoscopic bowel preparation in relatively high-BMI (≥ 24 kg/mBMC gastroenterology · 2023Trial
- Factors affecting the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopy in hard-to-prepare patients: Evidence from the literature.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe performed a
methodsA phase III, randomized, assessor-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority study was conducted comparing split-dose, low-volume SPMC oral solution with a powder formulation for oral solution. A
resultsBetween 82.8% and 92.5% of participants in any BMI group were responders by AS, and between 91.3% and 100% were responders by BBPS in the right colon. Efficacy was consistent across BMI groups, with no clear trends. Greater than 83% of participants in any BMI group found the preparation 'easy' or 'acceptable' to ingest, and the majority (>58%) rated SPMC oral solution as 'better' than a prior bowel preparation. In all BMI groups, safety data were similar to the overall cohort. Commonly reported, drug-related, treatment-emergent AEs were, by ascending BMI group, nausea (1.1%, 5.3%, 1.0%, 5.7%, and 0%) and headache (1.1%, 4.1%, 1.0%, 5.7%, and 0%).
conclusionsReady-to-drink SPMC oral solution had consistent, good quality colon cleansing, and favorable tolerability among participants of all BMI groups. CLINICALTRIALSGOV REGISTRATION: NCT03017235.
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.