ArticleTanaffos2025
Effect of Antibiotic Therapy against
Article in Tanaffos, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Materials and Methods: Fifty subjects resistant to high-dose inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta 2 agonist and other controllers such as montelukast or tiotropium were enrolled in this phase 3 clinical trial. Lophomonas was evaluated using a direct wet smear of bronchial lavage or induced sputum. Random allocation was performed by drawing lots from identical envelopes, and concealment was achieved by repackaging Tinidazole and placebo (vitamin B1) tablets in identical bottles. The clinic staff were blind to the study, and the code was opened by a pharmacist. The primary outcome was the asthma control test (ACT) score. Results: Direct smear showed Lophomonas in 52% of the Tinidazole group and 28% of the control group. Other baseline parameters were not significantly different between the Tinidazole and control groups. Cough disappeared in 12 out of 25 (48%) in the Tinidazole group (P=0.001), and the scoring of cough and dyspnea showed significant improvement in the Tinidazole group. Post-nasal drip, sputum, wheezing, and airway hyper-responsiveness were other secondary parameters that showed significant improvement. The ACT score improved from 16.84±2.65 at baseline to 23.11±2.58, and FENO and FEV1 were other objective outcomes that showed significant improvement. Conclusion:
Indexed as
Identifiers
42027446PMC13102340What 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.