ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes2020
Are Antimotility Agents Safe for Use in
Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post-transplant diarrhea in pediatric kidney transplant recipients.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2025Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the safety of antimotility agents (AAs) in a population of patients with hematologic malignancies and concurrent PATIENTS AND
methodsWe used the electronic health record to identify patients who were hospitalized in the adult malignant hematology service who had 1 or more toxin-positive
resultsThere were 339 patients who were stool toxin positive for CDI during the study period. Of those, 94 patients (27%) were prescribed AAs within 14 days of CDI diagnosis. All patients received CDI antimicrobial therapy within the first 24 hours. There were 2 adverse gastrointestinal events in the group that received AAs and 6 in the group that did not receive AAs. The risk of adverse events did not differ between patients who received AAs and those who did not (adjusted odds ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.06 to 2.10). The mean age of the full cohort was 52.7±15.5 years, and the mean length of stay was 26.7±22.6 days. Early AA use (<48 hours of diagnosis) was not associated with increased adverse effects.
conclusionThere was no increase in the incidence of gastrointestinal events in the arm that used AAs compared with the control arm. The evidence suggests that for patients with hematologic malignancies and CDI, the addition of AAs to appropriate antimicrobial therapy poses no additional risk.
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.