ArticleAyu
An observational study on acceptability, palatability, and safety of
Article in Ayu. 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, 0 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
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: National Institute of Ayurveda, Jaipur, India, had distributed Aim: The aim of present study was to explore the medication that may be effective in prevention of the COVID -19. Hence, this study was done to assess the compliance of these medicines and their effects in the prevention of COVID-19. Methods: One thousand seven hundred and fourteen frontline workers were provided with the AIBK for 15 days from April 24, 2020, to June 27, 2020. Data of frontline workers who had participated in AIBK and completed the treatment regimen with 2 weeks of follow-up after treatment with complete available data for safety, palatability, efficacy, and compliance were included in the study. Any adverse event needing hospitalization or medication, drug compliance and palatability, and appearance of the symptoms of COVID-19 or testing positive for COVID-19 were the outcome measures. Results: Out of 1714 participants, 1003 participants were found to be eligible for this analysis. The median age of these participants was 39 years (range, 19-70), and males accounted for 90.1% (904 of 1003). A total of 7.5% of participants (75 of 1003) reported having adverse events after taking the study treatment. None of the participants reported any serious adverse effects after the administration of the AIBK. The acceptability of the AIBK was as high as 97.4%. None of the participants reported positive for COVID-19 results or COVID-19 symptoms up to 2 weeks of follow-up after completion of the study treatment. Conclusion: The acceptability of AIBK is good and indicates its role in the prevention of COVID-19-like illness, hence further randomized control trials or cohort studies can be done to assess the mechanism of action and efficacy of AIBK as the preventive strategy in COVID-19.
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.