SynthesisJournal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology2023
Effect of Taste Additives on the Palatability of Activated Charcoal: a Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionActivated charcoal is a decontaminating agent used for acute intoxication. It can be mixed with taste additives to overcome its poor palatability. Our purpose was to evaluate the taste additives used to improve activated charcoal's palatability.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review of comparative studies on taste additives used to improve activated charcoal's palatability. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, and CINAHL. We included controlled trials and observational studies that evaluate the effect of at least one taste additive, compared with activated charcoal alone. Our primary outcome was palatability. Our secondary outcomes included treatment adherence, adsorption efficacy, and adverse events. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies.
resultsAmong 38 eligible articles, seven observational studies and three crossover clinical trials met our inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was found to be high for seven studies and intermediate for three others. The preferred flavoring agents were cola and chocolate milk for children, and sweetening agents for adults. All taste additives studied seemed to improve activated charcoal's palatability, except for yogurt (n = 1). The addition of bentonite, sorbitol, carboxymethylcellulose, or yogurt showed no impact on the in-vivo adsorption capacity of activated charcoal, whereas the results were inconclusive for chocolate. No meta-analysis was performed due to insufficient data.
conclusionStrategies to improve activated charcoal's palatability seem to enhance the taste. Descriptive data are in favor of a limited impact on activated charcoal's adsorption capacity when adding binding agents or sweeteners. TRIAL REGISTRATION ON PROSPERO: This review is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019135092.
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.