ArticleCureus2022
Intranasal Xylitol for the Treatment of COVID-19 in the Outpatient Setting: A Pilot Study.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Washing Illness Away: A Systematic Review of the Impact of Nasal Irrigation and Spray on COVID-19.The Laryngoscope · 2025Pooled it
- Saline nasal irrigation and gargling in COVID-19: Part II. Outcomes in Omicron and risk-benefit for self-care.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Xylitol for the prevention of acute otitis media episodes in children aged 1-5 years: a randomised controlled trial.Archives of disease in childhood · 2024Trial
- Whole-Genome Deep Sequencing of the Healthy Adult Nasal Microbiome.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Saline nasal irrigation and gargling in COVID-19: a multidisciplinary review of effects on viral load, mucosal dynamics, and patient outcomes.Frontiers in public health · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is well known that acute COVID-19 infection can present with a variety of symptoms, including fever, cough, rhinitis, loss of taste, and the cardinal sign of loss of smell (anosmia). Recently, nasal irrigations with saline and other agents have shown promise for the treatment of COVID-19. Xylitol has been shown to display virucidal effects against SARS-CoV-2. This study aimed to examine the efficacy of xylitol as an adjunct treatment for COVID-19 in an outpatient setting. In a randomized controlled double-blinded fashion, a total of 50 participants (F=30) consented to participate in this study. It was a population of 18 to 65 years of age, with polymerase chain reaction confirmed for SARS-COV-2 by nasopharyngeal swab, less than three days from the start of symptoms. This study's primary endpoint was time to clinical recovery, defined as the change from baseline to end of treatment in COVID-19 symptoms. Outcome variables were the changes in visual analog scale (VAS) and daily symptoms score (DSS) on Days 1-7, 14, and 28 after the initiation of the 14-day treatment. There were no differences between the treatment groups in any demographic and subject characteristics-related variables, including vaccination status. None of the patients were hospitalized, or required emergency visits in addition to no adverse reactions were reported. There were no statistically significant interactions found for VAS (P=0.124), DSS (P=0.448), and sense of smell (P=0.667). The proportion of patients reporting nasal congestion was higher (X
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.