ReviewVeterinary evidence
Comparison of single or two dose veterinarian-administered protocols and daily at-home prescription canine otitis externa treatments.
Review in Veterinary evidence. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PICO question: In adult dogs, are single or two dose veterinarian-administered ear treatments as effective in the treatment of otitis externa as daily prescription at-home cleaning/medicating treatments? Clinical bottom line: Category of research: Treatment. Number and type of study designs reviewed: Three randomised-controlled studies were critically appraised. Strength of evidence: Strong. Outcomes reported: All three studies demonstrated that both daily at-home cleaner/prescription medication and either single or two-dose veterinarian-administered ear treatments for canine otitis externa were effective. When comparing the final outcomes, there were no significant differences in the efficacy of either treatment option. One of the three studies reviewed did not note initial variations in pruritus levels within the first seven days, but by the end of each trial, both treatment protocols proved effective in reducing pruritus, pain, and cytology counts-including bacteria and fungi-with low relapse rates reported. Conclusion: Two dose veterinarian-administered ear treatments like Osurnia
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.