ArticleCaspian journal of internal medicine2025
Mesalazine vs. IBS-D: Examining its impact on patient symptoms & stool calprotectin levels: A randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Article in Caspian journal of internal medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is the most common disorder of the gastrointestinal system. The study aimed to determine the effect of Mesalazine prescription on patients' symptoms and level of fecal calprotectin in patients with IBS with predominant diarrhea and high fecal calprotectin. Methods: We conducted a double-blinded randomized clinical trial with 90 patients aged 18 to 45. These patients were selected from referrals to the gastroenterology clinic. They were evenly divided into two groups: the Mesalazine group, with an average age of 35.4, and the placebo group, with an average age of 36. The patients in both groups were then monitored for 8 weeks. There were no differences in the distribution of sexes between the two groups. Results: In comparison between before and after Mesalazine therapy in our patients marked a statistically significant effect on the quality of life variables (p<0.05), patient's level of pain (p<0.05), abdominal distension (p<0.05), and calprotectin level (p<0.05) compared to before Mesalazine in patients studied, which showed the effectiveness of this treatment. However its effect on stool form was not significant (P=0.11). Conclusion: Comparing the two groups after the intervention, the quality of life in patients treated with Mesalazine was significantly higher than in patients of the placebo group. The number of defecations in patients treated with Mesalazine was significantly lower than in patients of placebo groups. Abdominal distention and calprotectin levels were significantly lower in these patients than in patients of the placebo group.
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.