ArticleHeliyon2023
Carbapenems
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Carbapenems and β-lactam and β-lactamase inhibitors (BLBLIs) have been used empirically in nosocomial pneumonia, but their efficacy and safety are controversial. Objective: We carried out a systematic review with meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of carbapenems versus BLBLIs against nosocomial pneumonia. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CNKI, Wangfang, VIP and Sinomed were searched systematically through April 29, 2023 for clinical trials comparing carbapenems with BLBLIs for treatment of nosocomial pneumonia. Random-effects models were used to evaluate the impact of treatment on the risk ratio (RR) of all-cause mortality, clinical response, microbiologic response, resistance by Results: Seven randomized controlled trials containing 3306 patients met our inclusion criteria Our meta-analysis showed no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR = 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.75-1.03, I Conclusion: Differences in the prevalence of mortality, clinical cure, or clinical failure were not observed between carbapenems groups
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.