Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33062694›Full record

SynthesisBioMed research international2020

Rebamipide with Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs) versus PPIs Alone for the Treatment of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection-Induced Ulcers: A Meta-analysis.

Junyuan Liu, Zhencheng Xiong, Xuhua Geng, Meihua Cui

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BioMed research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Junyuan LiuPeking University Aerospace School of Clinical Medicine, Beijing 100049, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7103-2099
Zhencheng XiongInstitute of Medical Technology, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100191, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7834-5194
Xuhua GengPeking University Aerospace School of Clinical Medicine, Beijing 100049, China.
Meihua CuiPeking University Aerospace School of Clinical Medicine, Beijing 100049, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8707-3031
Peking University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo contrast the effect of rebamipide with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) versus PPIs alone for the treatment of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD-) induced ulcers.

methodsPubMed, Embase, the Cochrane library, the WanFang database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched to identify studies that met the inclusion criteria.

resultsNine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were recognized, including 1170 patients. In general, rebamipide plus PPIs acted better than PPIs alone against ESD-induced ulcers at four weeks (RR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.13-1.78,

conclusionEvidences now available show rebamipide plus PPIs is practical for protecting against ESD-induced ulcers at four weeks but not at eight weeks, especially large ulcers (>20 mm). However, we still need more high-quality RCTs in the future to supplement our conclusions.

Indexed as

AlanineAnti-Ulcer AgentsEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProton Pump InhibitorsQuinolonesStomach UlcerAlanineAnti-Ulcer AgentsProton Pump InhibitorsQuinolonesrebamipide

Identifiers

PMID33062694
PMCPMC7539128
OpenAlexW3089182465

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.