ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Sequential versus Standard Triple Therapy for First-Line
Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adjunctive Synbiotic Therapy forLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
- A comparative study of eradication rates, adverse events, and compliance between triple therapy and bismuth-containing quadruple therapy in children with Helicobacter pylori infection.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Monoterpene Indole Alkaloids with Antimicrobial Activity AgainstInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Current Understanding of Optimal Prevention of Helicobacter pylori-Induced Cancer.Gastroenterology clinics of North America · 2025Review
- A Comprehensive Overview of Antibacterial Agents for Combating Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria: The Current Landscape, Development, Future Opportunities, and Challenges.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Review
- Therapeutic advances and future directions inFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Genetic Determinants of Clarithromycin and Fluoroquinolones Resistance inAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Prospective Evaluation of a New Liquid-Type Rapid Urease Test Kit for Diagnosis ofDiagnostics (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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundnon-bismuth sequential therapy (SEQ) was suggested as a first-line anti-
methodsWe conducted a systematic review with a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of 10-day SEQ vs. STT (of at least 7 days) using bibliographical searches up to July 2021, including treatment-naïve adult or children. The intention-to-treat (ITT) eradication rate and the risk difference (RD) were calculated.
resultsOverall, 69 RCTs were evaluated, including 19,657 patients (9486 in SEQ; 10,171 in STT). Overall, SEQ was significantly more effective than STT (82% vs. 75%; RD 0.08;
conclusionsPrior to 2010, SEQ was significantly more effective than STT, notably when 7-day STT was prescribed. A tendency toward lower differences between SEQ and STT has been noted, especially when using 10-day STT. None of the therapies achieved an optimal efficacy and therefore cannot be recommended as a valid first-line
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.