ArticleJournal of research in pharmacy practice
Efficacy of Adding Oral N acetyl Cysteine Supplement to the Cystic Fibrosis Treatment Regimen: A Randomized Quasi-Experimental Trial.
Article in Journal of research in pharmacy practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study investigated the efficacy of adding the oral N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) supplement to the cystic fibrosis (CF) treatment regimen compared to adding a placebo. It also studied the quality of life and respiratory indicators of patients aged 6-18 with mild-to-moderate pulmonary involvement. Methods: This clinical trial was a randomized, quasi-experimental pilot and add-on therapy controlled with a placebo for 3 months. The case group received 200 mg of oral NAC three times a day. In contrast, the control group had a placebo in the same way. From the 2021 fall to the summer of 2022, 38 CF patients referred to Imam Hossein Children's Hospital Clinic were finally examined. They were clinically stable with a forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV Findings: The differences between the groups were not significant. In the placebo group, key measures remained unchanged, whereas the NAC group had an improvement in the CF Questionnaire-Revised score but no notable changes in other indices. Overall, comparisons of forced vital capacity (FVC) between the groups showed no variation. Conclusion: The indicators of FEV
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.