Trial reportOpen heart2022
Is the folk medicine known as "The Secret" efficient in reducing bleeding after percutaneous coronary procedures?: a double-blinded, randomised trial.
Trial report in Open heart, 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimPercutaneous coronary interventions require an arterial approach and administration of antithrombotic drugs. This may lead to bleeding complications. The aim of this study was to test whether "The Secret" - a pagan prayer - is effective in reducing post-interventional bleeding.
designRandomised controlled trial.
settingMonocentric, tertiary care centre.
participantsFrom January to July 2022, 200 patients (aged >18 years) undergoing elective coronary angiography were included in the study.
interventionThe intervention group received "The Secret
main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the rate of in-hospital bleeding according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) consensus definition.
resultsThe rate of bleeding was similar in both groups ("The Secret" group vs control group) with 16% versus 14% (p=0.69) of BARC 1, 12% versus 13% (p=0.81) of BARC 2, and 0% versus 0% of BARC 3 and 5 (p=1.00). Most (76%) of the participants believed that "The Secret
conclusionsThis study demonstrates no effect on bleeding after percutaneous coronary procedures. A large majority of our study population believe that "The Secret
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.