ReviewDigestion2026
The Efficacy and Safety of
Review in Digestion, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHelicobacter pylori eradication is clinically important in patients on hemodialysis (HD), who are at risk for serious gastrointestinal complications. However, altered drug metabolism and antibiotic resistance in patients on HD complicate H. pylori eradication. This study aimed to perform a network meta-analysis to synthesize existing evidence on the efficacy and safety of H. pylori eradication regimens in patients on HD.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Ichushi-Web, ICTRP, and <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://ClinicalTrials.gov" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">ClinicalTrials.gov</ext-link>. Two reviewers independently selected randomized controlled trials that evaluated H. pylori eradication therapy in patients undergoing HD. We performed a frequentist random effects network meta-analysis. The primary outcome was eradication rate, and the secondary outcomes were treatment completion rates and all adverse events. We used CINeMA to assess the confidence in the evidence. The study protocol was registered at OSF (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://osf.io/gn978/" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">https://osf.io/gn978/</ext-link>).
resultsTen trials involving 481 patients were included in the analysis. Seven eradication regimens were compared: six concomitant and one sequential regimen. Relative to standard-dose proton pump inhibitor/clarithromycin/amoxicillin regimens (PAC), the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of the proton pump inhibitor/clarithromycin regimen on the eradication rate (odds ratio, 0.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.01-1.07). For reduced-dose PAC (in which clarithromycin or amoxicillin is dose reduced), alternative regimens (with azithromycin, metronidazole, or levofloxacin), and sequential regimens, the estimates were too imprecise to determine whether a difference from PAC exists (low certainty). Treatment completion rates were generally favorable (83-100%), and adverse events were most frequent with standard-dose PAC (45%).
conclusionReduced-dose PAC and alternative and sequential regimens may be considered for H. pylori eradication in patients on HD.
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.