ArticleMedComm2023
Effectiveness and safety of four different beta-blockers in patients with chronic heart failure.
Article in MedComm, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does preoperative administration of hypotensive agents affect the quality of the surgical field during endoscopic sinus surgery? A triple-blind randomized controlled trial.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023Trial
- Adrenal hemorrhage: diagnostics, management, and treatment. Review and clinical update.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2025Review
- Metabolic and Pharmacokinetic Profiling Studies of N, N-Dimethylaniline-Heliamine in Rats by UHPLC-Q-Orbitrap MS/MS.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Investigating the effects of beta-blockers on circadian heart rhythm using heart rate variability in ischemic heart disease with preserved ejection fraction.Scientific reports · 2023Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of bisoprolol, metoprolol, carvedilol, and nebivolol in the treatment of chronic heart failure. The results demonstrated that bisoprolol improved the prognosis of chronic heart failure in comparison with carvedilol, and carvedilol exerted similar effects as metoprolol succinate and nebivolol and better effect than metoprolol tartrate (evidence levels: bisoprolol > carvedilol = metoprolol succinate = nebivolol > metoprolol tartrate; " > " means "prior to").
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.