Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32769886›Full record

ArticleMedicine2020

Probiotics, prebiotics, antibiotic, Chinese herbal medicine, and fecal microbiota transplantation in irritable bowel syndrome: Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Ying He, Rui Xu, Wei Wang, Jie Zhang, Xiaoyu Hu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. The Effect ofPolish journal of microbiology · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 4 countries.

Ying HeHospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu city, Sichuan province.ORCID 0000-0003-1327-9859
Rui XuHospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu city, Sichuan province.
Wei WangBeijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing city, China.
Jie ZhangHospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu city, Sichuan province.
Xiaoyu HuHospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu city, Sichuan province.
Weatherford College · USBeijing University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIrritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a functional gastrointestinal disease, with a high global incidence, which seriously influences the quality of life and work efficiency of patients. Extensive research showed that IBS is related to changes in the intestinal microenvironment. The novel treatment strategy targeting the gut microbiota is being actively implemented. Probiotics, antibiotics, prebiotics, fecal microbiota transplantation, and Chinese Herbal Medicine have been proven to be effective in the treatment of IBS, and all have an impact on the intestinal flora of patients. However, these 5 treatments have their own pros and cons and have not been systematically evaluated and compared. Therefore, this study will indirectly compare the safety and effectiveness of these 5 methods in the treatment of IBS through network meta-analysis.

methodsThe following databases including Embase, Pubmed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov will be retrieved from inception to June 2020 without language restrictions. Literature selection, data extraction, and bias analysis will be done by 2 researchers. The primary outcome is global symptoms improvement. The secondary outcomes will include individual IBS symptom scores, emotional response, and adverse events. The conventional pair-wise meta-analysis will be performed using Stata V.14.0 and be pooled using a random-effects model. We will use WinBUGS V.1.4.3 (Cambridge, United Kingdom) with a Bayesian hierarchical random-effects model to conduct the network meta-analysis.

resultsThis study will provide systematic reviews and indirect network comparison results about treatments of IBS.

conclusionsThis study will systematically evaluate and compare 5 intestinal flora-related therapies for IBS and to provide an evidence-based medical decision-making basis for clinicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: INPLASY202050047.

Indexed as

Fecal Microbiota TransplantationAdolescentAdultAgedAnti-Bacterial AgentsBayes TheoremDrugs, Chinese HerbalFemaleGastrointestinal MicrobiomeHumansIrritable Bowel SyndromeMaleMiddle AgedNetwork Meta-Analysis as TopicPrebioticsProbioticsAnti-Bacterial AgentsDrugs, Chinese HerbalPrebiotics

Identifiers

PMID32769886
PMCPMC7593021
OpenAlexW3048822343

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.