Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37451864›Full record

ArticleThorax2023

Emulated trial investigating effects of multiple treatments: estimating combined effects of mucoactive nebulisers in cystic fibrosis using registry data.

Emily Granger, Gwyneth Davies, Ruth H Keogh

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Thorax, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Emily GrangerDepartment of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK emily.granger@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-0134-1467
Gwyneth DaviesUCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, UCL, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7937-2728
Ruth H KeoghDepartment of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBGreat Ormond Street Hospital · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S017968/1Medical Research Council MR/T041285/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPeople with cystic fibrosis (CF) are often on multiple long-term treatments, including mucoactive nebulisers. In the UK, the most common mucoactive nebuliser is dornase alfa (DNase). A common therapeutic approach for people already on DNase is to add hypertonic saline (HS). The effects of DNase and HS used alone have been studied in randomised trials, but their effects in combination have not. This study investigates whether, for people already prescribed DNase, adding HS has additional benefit for lung function or use of intravenous antibiotics.

methodsUsing UK CF Registry data from 2007 to 2018, we emulated a target trial. We included people aged 6 years and over who were prescribed DNase without HS for 2 years. We investigated the effects of combinations of DNase and HS over 5 years of follow-up. Inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting was used to control confounding. The period predated triple combination CF transmembrane conductance regulator modulators in routine care.

results4498 individuals were included. At baseline, average age and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV

conclusionFor individuals with CF prescribed DNase, we found no evidence that adding HS had an effect on FEV

Indexed as

Cystic FibrosisAdministration, InhalationForced Expiratory VolumeHumansNebulizers and VaporizersRoutinely Collected Health DataSaline Solution, HypertonicSaline Solution, HypertonicCystic FibrosisNebuliser therapy

Identifiers

PMID37451864
PMCPMC10511967
OpenAlexW4384297618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.