SynthesisPathogens and global health2024
A systematic review of CQ-resistant
Synthesis in Pathogens and global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Leptospirosis and its co-infections in India: prevalence, geographic distribution, and clinical implications.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Pooled it
- Rising burden of Plasmodium vivax in Mizoram: an emerging threat to malaria elimination in Northeast India.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionChloroquine (CQ) is the drug of choice for treating uncomplicated
methodsPubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science, were searched using the search string: 'Malaria AND vivax AND chloroquine AND (resistance OR resistant) AND India'. We systematically reviewed in-vivo and in-vitro drug efficacy studies that investigated the CQ efficacy of
resultsWe identified 12 eligible CQ therapeutic efficacy studies involving 2470 patients, Of these 2329 patients were assessed by in-vivo therapeutic efficacy methods and the remaining 141 were assessed by in-vitro methods. CQ resistance was found in 25/1787 (1.39%) patients from in-vivo and in 11/141 (7.8%) patients from in-vitro drug efficacy studies.
conclusionBased on the available studies, the prevalence of CQ resistance in
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.