↓ Skip to main content

Randomized double-blind clinical trial of Moluodan (摩罗丹) for the treatment of chronic atrophic gastritis with dysplasia

Overview of attention for article published in Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
Randomized double-blind clinical trial of Moluodan (摩罗丹) for the treatment of chronic atrophic gastritis with dysplasia
Published in
Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11655-015-2114-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xu-dong Tang, Li-ya Zhou, Shu-tian Zhang, You-qing Xu, Quan-cai Cui, Li Li, Jing-jing Lu, Peng Li, Fang Lu, Feng-yun Wang, Ping Wang, Li-qun Bian, Zhao-xiang Bian

Abstract

To assess the efficacy and safety of Moluodan () in treating dysplasia in chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG) patients. This was a multi-centered, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. The total of 196 subjects were assigned to receive either Moluodan or folic acid in a 2:1 ratio by blocked randomization. Mucosa marking targeting biopsy (MTB) was used to insure the accuracy and consistency between baseline and after 6-month treatment. Primary outcomes were histological score, response rate of pathological lesions and dysplasia disappearance rate. Secondary endpoints included gastroscopic findings, clinical symptom and patient reported outcome (PRO) instrument. Dysplasia score decreased in Moluodan group (P=0.002), signififcance was found between groups (P=0.045). Dysplasia disappearance rates were 24.6% and 15.2% in Moluodan and folic acid groups respectively, no significant differences were found (P=0.127). The response rate of atrophy and intestinal metaplasia were 34.6% and 23.0% in Moluodan group, 24.3% and 13.6% in folic acid group. Moluodan could improve erythema (P=0.044), and bile reflflux (P=0.059), no signifificance between groups. Moluodan was better than folic acid in improving epigastric pain, epigastric suffocation, belching and decreased appetite (P<0.05), with symptom disappearance rates of 37% to 83%. Moluodan improved dysplasia score in histopathology, and erythema and bile reflflux score in endoscopy, and superior to folic acid in improving epigastric pain, epigastric suffocation, belching and decreased appetite. [ChiCTR-TRC-00000169].

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Researcher 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Student > Master 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 12 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Unknown 13 54%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 October 2015.
All research outputs
#15,348,067
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine
#294
of 675 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,899
of 274,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine
#7
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 675 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,923 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.