SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2026
Comparative effectiveness of dietary supplements in dilated cardiomyopathy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 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
Abstract
backgroundDilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is a major cause of heart failure and cardiovascular mortality, partly due to impaired myocardial energy metabolism. Dietary supplements may offer benefits through improved mitochondrial function and antioxidant effects, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggest they can enhance cardiac function in DCM. However, direct comparisons among supplements are lacking, and the optimal strategy and dose-response relationship remain undetermined.
methodsEight databases were searched for RCTs evaluating dietary supplements in DCM. Continuous outcomes were analysed by frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA; Stata/MP 18.0); N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class were synthesised by pairwise meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool and certainty of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
resultsFourteen RCTs (1,259 participants) were included. For left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), coenzyme Q
conclusionsIn this network, higher-dose CoQ
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.