ArticleProceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)2023
Fecal calprotectin level in microscopic colitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Resolution of Levodopa/Dopa-Decarboxylase Inhibitor-Associated Microscopic Colitis with Subcutaneous Foslevodopa/Foscarbidopa: A Case Series and Review of the Literature.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2026Review
- Chronic Diarrhea Owing to Microscopic Colitis: A Cohort Study with Insights into Diagnostic Challenges and Size of the Problem.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There are no specific biomarkers for microscopic colitis (MC), and the diagnosis depends on histopathological tissue obtained during colonoscopy. Studies on the role of fecal calprotectin (FCP) in MC are limited. A literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus was conducted from each database's inception through September 2022. Methods: A DerSimonian-Liard random-effects meta-analysis was performed to examine the standardized mean difference (SMD) in FCP levels between patients with MC and control patients with chronic diarrhea. Results: Six studies with 96 active MC patients and 200 controls were included in the meta-analysis. Random effects meta-analysis revealed that FCP was significantly and moderately elevated in patients with MC compared to the control group (SMD = 0.6 [95% CI 0.3, 1.0], Conclusion: These results indicate that FCP levels in patients with chronic diarrhea can help identify patients with MC. More studies with serial measurements of FCP would provide a better understanding of its utility in MC.
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.