SynthesisComputational intelligence and neuroscience2022
The Efficacy and Safety of Mizoribine versus Mycophenolate Mofetil for the Treatment of Renal Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and Safety of Mizoribine in the Treatment of Lupus Nephritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Rheumatology and therapy · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mizoribine (MZR) is widely used in Asia due to its high safety and low cost, and comparative studies of its safety and efficacy with the first-line drug mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) have been carried out. This paper aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of MZR and MMF in immunosuppressive therapy of renal transplantation by meta-analysis. Methods: We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MZR versus MMF for renal transplantation in PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Cochrane Library, Web of Science, WanFang Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM). Articles were assessed for their risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration. Forest plots and funnel plots were also performed on the included articles. Results: A total of twelve studies with 1103 patients were selected in the analysis. No significant difference were observed between the MZR group and the MMF group for the rate of acute rejection (RR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.01,
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.