ArticleGalen medical journal2019
Effect of
Article in Galen medical journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Ma'aljobon Aftimouni (Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2025Article
- Review
- Evaluation of theAvicenna journal of phytomedicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMATERIALS AND
methodsIn this triple-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial, the intervention group received a dose of 500 mg of CE in the form of a capsule to be taken twice a day accompanied by an appropriate dose of risperidone. The control group was presented with a placebo identical to that of the CE capsule plus the allocated dose of risperidone. The PANSS and SCoRS questionnaires were used to assess the status of subjects prior to the initiation of the intervention as well as being put to use at the end of the second, fourth, and eighth week post-intervention. Registering and recording intel concerning positive and negative symptoms felt by participants (PANNS), and a test to assess the cognitive impairment of the individuals.
resultsAfter eight weeks of treatment, all negative and positive symptoms besides hostility and somatic concern exhibited a significant improvement in the CE group (P <0.05). In contrast, the CE placebo group displayed no substantial improvement in the cases of the positive, negative and general symptoms (P>0.05) regarding cognitive impairment, after eight weeks of treatment, all symptoms were greatly improved in the CE group (P<0.05), while the effect of the placebo on the patients cognitive impairment remained mostly stationary (P>0.05). Consequently, after eight weeks after the intervention, we can determine that the CE treatment has been noticeably more effective at improving positive, negative and cognitive symptoms of patients with schizophrenia.
conclusionThe results of this study demonstrated that CE, possessing possible antioxidant and neuroprotective properties, safely improved the positive and negative symptoms, and cognitive impairment of patients with schizophrenia.
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.