Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33348662›Full record

ReviewNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2020

High Potency of Organic and Inorganic Nanoparticles to Treat Cystic Echinococcosis: An Evidence-Based Review.

Aishah E Albalawi, Abdullah D Alanazi, Parastoo Baharvand, Maryam Sepahvand, Hossein Mahmoudvand

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Nanoparticles as Alternatives for the Control ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Membrane-Coated Iron Oxide (FeInternational journal of nanomedicine · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Aishah E AlbalawiFaculty of Science, University of Tabuk, Tabuk 47912, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-7695-8691
Abdullah D AlanaziDepartment of Biological Science, Faculty of Science and Humanities, Shaqra University, P.O. Box 1040, Ad-Dawadimi 11911, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-4862-7668
Parastoo BaharvandDepartment of Social Medicine, School of Medicine, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad 6813833946, Iran.
Maryam SepahvandStudent Research Committee, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad 6813833946, Iran.
Hossein MahmoudvandRazi Herbal Medicines Research Center, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad 6813833946, Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-4194-393X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since there is no potential, effective vaccine available, treatment is the only controlling option against hydatid cyst or cystic echinococcosis (CE). This study was designed to systematically review the in vitro, in vivo, and ex vivo effects of nanoparticles against hydatid cyst. The study was carried out based on the 06- PRISMA guideline and registered in the CAMARADES-NC3Rs Preclinical Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Facility (SyRF) database. The search was performed in five English databases, including Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Google Scholar without time limitation for publications around the world about the protoscolicdal effects of all the organic and inorganic nanoparticles without date limitation in order to identify all the published articles (in vitro, in vivo, and ex vivo). The searched words and terms were: "nanoparticles", "hydatid cyst", "protoscoleces", "cystic echinococcosis", "metal nanoparticles", "organic nanoparticles", "inorganic nanoparticles, "in vitro", ex vivo", "in vivo". Out of 925 papers, 29 papers including 15 in vitro (51.7%), 6 in vivo (20.7%), ex vivo 2 (6.9%), and 6 in vitro/in vivo (20.7%) up to 2020 met the inclusion criteria for discussion in this systematic review. The results demonstrated the most widely used nanoparticles in the studies were metal nanoparticles such as selenium, silver, gold, zinc, copper, iron nanoparticles (

Indexed as

ex vivohydatid cystin vitroin vivonanomedicineprotoscoleces

Identifiers

PMID33348662
PMCPMC7766156

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.