ReviewGastroenterology research and practice2026
A Review on the Progress and Strategies of
Review in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2026. 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.
- A Review on the Progress and Strategies ofGastroenterology research and practice · 2026Review
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
Background: Methods: A literature search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the China Science and Technology Journal Database, and the Wanfang Database up to January 10, 2026, was conducted with the search strategy (" Results: The final literature review included 132 treatment groups from 56 studies in nine different countries or regions, with a total of 5542 patients included in the analyses. The overall eradication rates of triple regimens were unsatisfactory (72.9%, 95% CI 70.7%-75.2%). The classic quadruple therapy (PPI, bismuth, tetracycline, and metronidazole) is commonly recommended due to its relatively satisfactory efficacy and sufficient research evidence (81.4%, 95% CI 78.6%-84.2%). The mean eradication rate for other regimens containing new drugs such as minocycline, cefuroxime, sitafloxacin, vonoprazan, and rifabutin is well (> 80%). Conclusion: The classical bismuth quadruple therapy used to be the most commonly used regimen. The overall eradication efficacy of triple therapies is unacceptable. Although new drugs and regimens have emerged, their efficacy needs confirmation through more high-quality, large-scale clinical studies to identify the optimal eradication therapy regimen. Individualized treatment, particularly therapies tailored based on the results of genetic antibiotic resistance testing, represents an important direction for future research.
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.