ArticleClinics and practice2026
Efficacy of
Article in Clinics and practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
BACKGROUND/
objectivesMore than 50% of adult women experience at least one urinary tract infection (UTI) during their lifetime, and approximately 25% develop recurrent UTIs (rUTIs), defined as ≥2 episodes within six months. Management of rUTI is challenging and often requires long-term, multimodal preventive strategies.
methodsIn this prospective observational study, 40 premenopausal women with rUTI were enrolled. Twenty patients received EcN prophylaxis (twice daily for four weeks, followed by once daily for eight weeks), while 20 patients received no prophylaxis and served as controls. Patients were followed for six months (three months of treatment and three months post-treatment). The primary outcome was the frequency of symptomatic rUTI episodes during follow-up.
resultsForty patients were analyzed (20 EcN; 20 controls). During the six-month observation period, 55% (11/20) of patients in the EcN group remained UTI-free compared with 35% (7/20) in the control group. Two patients (10%) in the EcN group experienced a single recurrence versus three (15%) in the control group. Recurrent episodes (≥2 UTIs) occurred in 35% (7/20) of EcN-treated patients compared with 50% (10/20) of controls. Overall, EcN prophylaxis was associated with a lower proportion of patients experiencing multiple recurrences.
conclusionsProphylaxis with
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.