ArticleBMJ open2021
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Pooled it
- Beyond the Stomach: Exploring the Role ofExpert reviews in molecular medicine · 2026Review
- Burden of intestinal protozoan parasites coinciding with Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with gastrointestinal symptoms.Gut pathogens · 2026Article
- Article
- Exploring compositional and predicted functional alterations of gut microbiota in H. pylori infection.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Commentary: Association betweenFrontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Relationship betweenFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Review
- Important Recommendations Regarding the Test-and-Treat Strategy forInquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe relationship between
designCross-sectional study. SETTING AND
participantsWe included subjects from a longitudinal project involving
interventionsThe intestinal microbiota was evaluated in stool specimens using 16S rRNA gene/DNA/amplicon sequencing with next-generation sequencing. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed alpha and beta diversity, just as well as relative abundances within the bacterial composition at the genus level in both groups.
resultsAs shown by the alpha diversity of the 16S rRNA gene/DNA/amplicon sequence data, the control group exhibited lower microbial species richness with lower alpha diversity compared with the
conclusionTRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000028721.
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.