ArticleHeterocycles2012
Synthesis of a Library of 1,5,2-Dithiazepine 1,1-Dioxides. Part 1: A One-Pot Sulfonylation/Thia-Michael Protocol.
Article in Heterocycles, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A summary of seven- and eight-membered ring sultam syntheses via three Michael addition reactions.Molecular diversity · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A novel one-pot sulfonylation/intramolecular thia-Michael protocol is reported for the synthesis of 1,5,2-dithiazepine 1,1-dioxides. Sulfonylation between cysteine ethyl ester/cysteamine and 2-chloroethanesulfonyl chloride, followed by
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.