Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18590956›Full record

ReviewRespiratory medicine2008

Traditional Chinese medicine in the treatment of acute respiratory tract infections.

Taixiang Wu, Xunzhe Yang, Xiaoxi Zeng, Phillippa Poole

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Respiratory medicine, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Preventive Efficacy of Dried Lime (Galen medical journal · 2020
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Determination of total organic carbon and soluble solids contents inChemometrics and intelligent laboratory systems : an international journal sponsored by the Chemometrics Society · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Taixiang WuChinese Cochrane Centre, Chinese Evidence-Based Medicine Centre, International Clinical Epidemiology Resource and Training Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37, Guo Xue Xiang, Chengdu 610041, China. txwutx@hotmail.com
Xunzhe Yang
Xiaoxi Zeng
Phillippa Poole
Sichuan University · CNUniversity of Auckland · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo review the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews for the effectiveness of traditional Chinese medicinal (TCM) herbs for treating acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) and to discuss the limitations of current clinical trials of TCM.

findingsEvidence from six Cochrane systematic reviews was weak owing to the lack of high-quality TCM trials. Limitations were usually due to biases that influenced the validity of results.

conclusionsTCM is widely used for treating ARTIs. However, none of the identified studies has been well designed or conducted. In this overview, we suggest that clinical trials of TCM for ARTIs need to be re-run in accordance with internationally recognized standards.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseBronchitisCommon ColdDrugs, Chinese HerbalEvidence-Based MedicineHumansInfluenza, HumanMedicine, Chinese TraditionalPharyngitisPhytotherapyResearch DesignRespiratory Tract InfectionsDrugs, Chinese Herbal

Identifiers

PMID18590956
PMCPMC7134919
OpenAlexW2027801736

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.