Trial reportThe Journal of international medical research2022
Portable electronic bronchoscopy for clinical application: a multi-institutional randomized instrument validation study.
Trial report in The Journal of international medical research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveElectronic bronchoscopy is routinely used for the diagnosis and treatment of lung and bronchial disorders. However, the devices used are normally large and costly. Here, we evaluated the clinical effectiveness of a portable electronic bronchoscope produced by Zhejiang UE Medical Corp., the UE-EB.
methodsWe conducted a multi-institutional, randomized, single-blind, non-inferiority and parallel-group controlled clinical trial. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to the experimental group or control group. The primary indicator was the effectiveness of the device. Safety indicators were assessed from enrollment to 3 days after the operation.
resultsThe UE-EB had good consistency between groups during the procedure, and the effective rate was 100.00% in both groups. The difference value (95% confidence interval) between the two groups was 0.00% (-5.45%, 5.45%), and the lower limit was greater than -10% (negative non-inferiority margin). There was also no difference between the two groups in terms safety indicators.
conclusionsThe portable electronic bronchoscope described in this study showed reliable effectiveness and safety. This device is worth promoting and applying in clinical practice.
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.