Observational studyScience progress
Low-temperature plasma adenoidectomy versus conservative treatment for children with adenoid hypertrophy and allergic rhinitis: A non-randomized observational study.
Observational study in Science progress. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of low-temperature radiofrequency ablation (LTRFA) adenoidectomy on the improvement of allergic rhinitis (AR) in children with adenoid hypertrophy (AH) complicated by AR, in comparison with conservative pharmacological management.MethodsA total of 89 pediatric patients with AH complicated by AR were enrolled in this non-randomized observational study. Among them, 59 underwent LTRFA adenoidectomy under nasal endoscopy, and 30 received conservative anti-allergic therapy (patients who declined surgical intervention). Symptom severity was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS; score 1-10) at baseline and at 6 months of follow-up. Improvement was defined as a reduction in VAS score of ≥3 points from baseline. Between-group comparison of VAS change scores was performed using an independent-samples t-test.ResultsBaseline VAS scores were comparable between groups (surgical: 7.85±1.46; conservative: 7.63±1.52; P=0.512). At 6 months, the mean VAS change score was 4.95±1.90 in the surgical group and 2.51±1.44 in the conservative group, a difference that was statistically significant (P<0.001). Based on the improvement criterion (VAS reduction ≥3 points), 52 of 59 surgical patients (88.1%) and 17 of 30 conservative patients (56.7%) met the threshold (χ
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.