SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2024
Effects and safety of
Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Pleiotropic Bioactivity of Caterpillar Fungus, Orange Cordyceps, and Cordycepin: Insight from Integrated Network Pharmacology and Food and Drug Regulatory Framework.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Anti-Inflammatory Mechanisms and Translational Relevance ofJournal of inflammation research · 2026Review
- The Pathogenesis of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) and the Preventive and Therapeutic Effects of Natural Products.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ethnopharmacological relevance: Materials and methods: A systematic search through nine electronic databases up to 31 April 2024, was conducted for related studies. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to evaluate the quality of studies. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was used to assess the certainty of evidence. Two researchers independently searched the literature and evaluated the risk of bias. Results: After the screening, 35 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2,914 patients were eventually included. The meta-analysis showed that using Conclusion: The current evidence indicates that patients with dialysis receiving Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022324508, registration number CRD42022324508.
Indexed as
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.