ArticleClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology2021
Role of
Article in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors associated with chronic urticaria in Asian populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.JAAD international · 2026Article
- ActiveJournal of clinical medicine research · 2026Article
- Association betweenMicroorganisms · 2023Article
- Review
- Article
- Acupuncture for gastrointestinal urticaria: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the role of
methodsRetrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of 522 patients with CSU who underwent a HP breath test in Hangzhou Third People's Hospital between January 2018 and December 2019. The CSU-HP(+) group consisted of patients with CSU and HP infection, who were treated with antihistamines combined with HP eradication therapy. The CSU-HP(-) group consisted of patients with CSU alone, who were treated with antihistamines. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis, using the nearest neighbor matching method on a 1:1 basis, was performed to ensure the characteristics of the CSU-HP(+) and CSU-HP(-) groups were similar. Factors, including age, gender, white blood cells, red blood cells, platelets, alanine transaminase, creatinine, immunoglobulin E, and pre-treatment urticaria activity score (UAS), were matched to obtain a balanced cohort of patients in each group. Therapeutic effects were compared after matching.
resultsPatients in the CSU-HP(+) group reported significantly more gastrointestinal symptoms than those in the CSU-HP(-) group. UAS scores in the second week of treatment were significantly different between the two groups. After 3 months, the recurrence rate in the CSU-HP(+) group was lower than in the CSU-HP(-) group.
conclusionEradication of HP infection in patients with CSU helps relieve gastrointestinal symptoms, improves the therapeutic effect of CSU within 2 weeks, and reduces the recurrence rate 3 months after treatment.
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.