ArticleJGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology2026
Efficacy of Fermented Brown Rice by
Article in JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a diffuse, nonspecific inflammation of the colon of unknown cause. Basic and clinical studies suggest that UC may be ameliorated by dietary fiber intake. Fermented brown rice by Materials and Methods: Patients were divided into two groups: Group A (administered FBRA for 14 weeks, followed by a washout period, and then administered nonfunctional foods (NF) for 14 weeks) and Group B (NF and then FBRA). The primary endpoint is the presence or absence of improvement in clinical activity index (CAI) scores before and after the intervention. The secondary endpoints are the pre- and postintervention changes in blood data indicating inflammation (e.g., high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (CRP)) and nutritional status (e.g., serum proteins), and the adverse events. Results: Fifty-six patients consented to participate: 19 in Group A and 21 in Group B completed the trial. Improvement in the CAI scores was not observed with FBRA. In the ITT analysis of the blood data, however, high-sensitivity CRP, erythrocyte sedimentation rate hourly, white blood cell count, serum protein level, and serum albumin level all tended to be improved from the preintervention level (improvement ratio 1.70; 95% CI 0.97-2.98). No serious adverse event was observed. Conclusion: There is an expectation that FBRA may be effective in improving inflammation in patients with UC. Therefore, a large-scale validation study should be conducted in the future.
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.