ArticleSAGE open medicine2022
Vulvovaginal candidiasis: A real-world evidence study of the perceived benefits of Canesten
Article in SAGE open medicine, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Innovative simvastatin-loaded emulgel effectively treats vulvovaginal candidiasis: in vivo efficacy and in vitro biopharmaceutical analysis.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2025Article
- Genital cutaneous candidiasis versus chronic recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis: distinct diseases, different populations.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2025Review
- Review of Challenges in Performing Real-World Evidence Studies for Nonprescription Products.Pragmatic and observational research · 2025Review
- Three-Dose Antifungal Treatment Improves the Efficacy for Severe Vulvovaginal Candidiasis.Mycopathologia · 2024Article
- A real-world evidence study evaluating consumer experience of Supradyn Recharge or Supradyn Magnesium and Potassium during demanding periods.Drugs in context · 2023Article
- A systematic review of mucoadhesive vaginal tablet testing.Drug target insightsReview
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Vulvovaginal candidiasis is common in women, causing discomfort and negatively impacting quality of life. Canesten Methods: Eligible participants were female, aged 18-60 years, and had experienced at least one episode of vaginal thrush (United Kingdom)/vaginal yeast infection (Canada) during the previous 6 months for which they had used at least one of the six Canesten products. Participants completed an online questionnaire eliciting information on the speed of onset of symptom relief, impact on quality of life, and product attributes/satisfaction. Results: Over 90% of respondents reported improvements in symptoms and quality of life after starting treatment with a Canesten product. Improvements in symptoms within 4 h of the first time of use were perceived by 42% of consumers; 76%-88% reported symptomatic relief within 1 day. The perceived general speed of onset of symptomatic relief with a Canesten oral product (1-2 days) was slightly longer than that with a Canesten topical/intra-vaginal product (⩽1 day). Most users of Canesten single (90%) and dual product treatments (95%) reported that the products started to work from the first application. Women experiencing both internal and external symptoms of thrush/vaginal yeast infection reported Canesten dual product formulations to provide faster symptomatic relief than single product treatments. Over 90% of respondents were satisfied with their use of a Canesten product. Conclusion: Canesten was found by consumers to offer rapid relief of the symptoms of thrush/vaginal yeast infection with improvements in quality of life. Consumer satisfaction was high.
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.