Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32322697›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2020

Resveratrol plus carboxymethyl-β-glucan in infants with common cold: A randomized double-blind trial.

Maria Elisabetta Baldassarre, Antonio Di Mauro, Grazia Labellarte, Mariacristina Pignatelli, Margherita Fanelli, Elisa Schiavi, Paola Mastromarino, Manuela Capozza, Raffaella Panza, Nicola Laforgia

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Resveratrol and Gut Microbiota Synergy: Preventive and Therapeutic Effects.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Dietary Supplements for COVID-19.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2021
    Review
  20. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maria Elisabetta BaldassarreDepartment of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, Neonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Bari 70100, Italy.
Antonio Di MauroDepartment of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, Neonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Bari 70100, Italy.
Grazia LabellarteDepartment of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, Neonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Bari 70100, Italy.
Mariacristina PignatelliDepartment of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, Neonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Bari 70100, Italy.
Margherita FanelliDepartment of Interdisciplinary Medicine, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Bari 70100, Italy.
Elisa SchiaviDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Disease, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome 00100, Italy.
Paola MastromarinoDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Disease, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome 00100, Italy.
Manuela CapozzaDepartment of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, Neonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Bari 70100, Italy.
Raffaella PanzaDepartment of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, Neonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Bari 70100, Italy.
Nicola LaforgiaDepartment of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, Neonatology and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, "Aldo Moro" University of Bari, Bari 70100, Italy.
University of Bari Aldo Moro · ITSapienza University of Rome · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate effectiveness of a nasal resveratrol/carboxymethyl-β-glucan solution compared to nasal saline solution: a) on common cold symptoms by means of a validated measure scale (CARIFS score), b) on Rhinovirus infection and CCL2, CCL5, IL8, IL6, CXCL10 and TLR2 expression in nasal swabs, c) on frequency of relapses after 30 days of follow-up.

methods89 infants with respiratory infection symptoms were randomly assigned to receive either a nasal resveratrol/carboxymethyl-β-glucan solution or nasal saline solution.All patients were evaluated with CARIFS score at enrollment, after 48 h, 7 and 30 days by physicians and parents. Nasal swabs were obtained at enrollment, after 48 h and after one week.

resultsCARIFS score improved in both groups. Episodes of sneezing and cough were fewer in study group after 7 days of follow-up (p < 0.05). No significant differences were found on nasopharyngeal swabs in Rhinovirus detection and cytokines expression after 48 h, nor in 30 days relapses. TLR2 expression was significantly higher in Rhinovirus infected children of the study group. No adverse effects occurred.

conclusionsThese data suggest that a solution containing resveratrol plus carboxymethyl-β-glucan might have a positive impact on both clinical and socio-economic burden due to infant common cold.

Indexed as

AntioxidantBiological sciencesBiomolecules"Common cold" [Mesh]MicrobiologyMolecular biologyNatural productNatural product chemistryPharmaceutical scienceResveratrol/carboxymethyl-β-glucan"Rhinovirus" [Mesh]Toxicology

Identifiers

PMID32322697
PMCPMC7172624
OpenAlexW3019143678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.