ReviewCureus2025
Expert Consensus Guidance on the Management of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: An Indian Perspective.
Review in Cureus, 2025. 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) significantly impact patients' quality of life and treatment adherence, with high incidence rates despite the use of antiemetic prophylaxis. While international guidelines provide recommendations for managing CINV, the diverse healthcare landscape in India necessitates tailored, region-specific guidelines. This study was conducted to develop and validate consensus-based clinical statements on CINV management tailored to the Indian context, aiming to enhance the quality of cancer care across the nation by aligning international insights with local experiences. A comprehensive literature review and a consensus-based methodology were employed. 150 Indian oncologists participated in developing 14 clinical statements through the modified Delphi method. Two rounds of voting were conducted to assess agreement levels, categorizing the statements into the following three categories: consensus, near or fair consensus, and no consensus. Consensus was achieved for 11, while three received near or fair consensus. In areas where data or agreement was lacking, expert opinions were incorporated to supplement the findings. One of the findings from this study indicated strong consensus for the use of netupitant and palonosetron along with dexamethasone as the preferred CINV prophylactic regimens in an Indian setting. The consensus statements developed in this study will assist Indian oncologists in making informed, tailored decisions regarding CINV prevention and management across diverse healthcare settings.
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.