ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Impact of
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical feasibility test of 60 kVp double-low-dose coronary CT angiography with a deep learning reconstruction algorithm.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- New insights into contrast-associated acute kidney injury: the key role of endothelial dysfunction.Frontiers in nephrology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to investigate the protective effects of Methods: Twenty Beagle dogs with induced renal insufficiency were enrolled in the study and randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 5 per group). Group A received Results: CCTA imaging revealed that the CT values of the major coronary artery branches in all groups met the international diagnostic criteria for coronary arteries. No statistically significant differences in image quality were observed among the four groups (P > 0.05). In Groups A and D, significant changes were observed in renal function parameters, as well as in D, D*, f, and R2* values, both pre- and post-CCTA (P < 0.05). However, Groups B and C exhibited no significant changes pre- and post-CCTA (P > 0.05). A significant correlation was found between MRI parameters and laboratory renal function markers, with excellent inter- and intra-observer reproducibility, and high repeatability in the measurements. Conclusion: HR-dependent personalized CM CCTA imaging did not compromise image quality. Administration of
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.