SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005
Chinese medicinal herbs for influenza.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chinese medicinal herbs for influenza.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Chinese medicinal herbs for the common cold.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2007Pooled it
- Pilot study of the use of Yin Qiao San in children with conventional antipyretic hypersensitivity.Asia Pacific allergy · 2015Article
- Evaluating the quality of randomized controlled trials that examine the efficacy of natural health products: a systematic review of critical appraisal instruments.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2009Article
- Traditional Chinese medicine in the treatment of acute respiratory tract infections.Respiratory medicine · 2008Review
Corrections and comments
- Reprinted as
- Updated by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInfluenza is an acute respiratory communicable disease which can cause high morbidity and mortality in an epidemic. Traditional Chinese medicinal herbs following a particular theory may be a potential medicine of choice.
objectivesThe objective of this review was to assess the therapeutic effect and adverse reaction of Traditional Chinese medicinal herbs in treating uncomplicated influenza. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2004); MEDLINE (January 1966 to October 2004); EMBASE (January 1988 to October 2004); CBM (Chinese Biomedical Database) (January 1980 to December 2003); and the Chinese Cochrane Center's Controlled Trials Register (up to December 2003). We also searched Current Controlled Trials (www.controlled-trials.com) and the National Research Register (http://www.update-software.com/National/) for ongoing trials and reference lists of articles. We wrote to researchers in the field, or authors of studies evaluated in the review for more information. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing traditional Chinese medicinal herbs with placebo, or various other Chinese medicinal herbs, or with other current regimes normally used in care or comparing drugs with herbal preparations to simple drugs in treating defined uncomplicated influenza patients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two reviewers extracted data and assessed trial quality. MAIN
resultsEleven studies with the number of participants ranged from 52 to 479. In total 2,088 participants were included in the review. As the interventions of the included studies were different from each other and most of the studies were of low quality, we did not perform a summary meta-analysis. Some of the studies showed positive results favouring Traditional Chinese medicinal herb treatment compared to antiviral or antipyretic-analgesic drugs or the combination of them. Only three studies mentioned adverse reactions but no detailed data were acquired in the included studies. Eleven studies with the number of participants ranged from 52 to 479, 2,088 in total were included. As the interventions of the included studies were different from each other and most of the studies were of low quality, we failed to perform a summary meta-analysis. Some of the studies showed positive results favouring Traditional Chinese medicinal herb treatment compared to antiviral or antipyretic-analgesic drugs or the combination of them. Only three studies mentioned adverse reactions but no detailed data was acquired in the included studies. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThe small number of included studies and participants, as well as the low quality of most studies, made the evidence far from conclusive for clinical decision making, although traditional Chinese medicinal herbs as a whole seem to be comparatively or more effective compared to different chemical drugs. A certain herbal preparation could not be recommended for there was not enough evidence. More high quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with similar interventions are required to strengthen the evidence for the efficacy and safety of certain herbal preparation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.