ArticleBMJ open2024
Respiratory rehabilitation techniques for patients with cystic fibrosis: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCystic fibrosis (CF) is an autosomal recessive genetic disorder caused by mutations in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gene, primarily affecting the respiratory and digestive systems. Respiratory rehabilitation techniques play a crucial role in managing pulmonary symptoms and maintaining lung function in CF patients. Although various techniques have been developed and applied, there is currently no globally recognised optimal respiratory rehabilitation regimen. This study intends to conduct a network meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate and compare the effectiveness of different respiratory rehabilitation techniques in CF patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The following key electronic bibliographic databases will be searched from inception to September 2024: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL and Physiotherapy Evidence Database. We will include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compare the efficacy of various respiratory rehabilitation techniques in CF patients, such as airway clearance techniques, exercise training and inspiratory muscle training. The primary outcomes will be lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s and forced vital capacity) and exercise capacity (VO2 max and 6 min walk test). Secondary outcomes will include quality of life, frequency of pulmonary exacerbations, hospitalisation rates and adverse events. If permitted, data will be synthesised using traditional pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis, with the quality of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval will not be required for this protocol. The results of the final review will be disseminated via peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024574551.
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.