SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2008
Chuanxiong-type preparations for acute ischemic stroke.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Efficacy and Safety of Ischemic Stroke Therapies: An Umbrella Review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Chuanxiong-type preparations for acute ischemic stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2008Pooled it
- Salvianolic acid B and Senkyunolide I synergistically alleviate cardiac hypertrophy and regulate MAP3K1 signaling.Chinese medicine · 2025Article
- Key Phytochemicals and Biological Functions ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Overview of Cochrane reviews on Chinese herbal medicine for stroke.Integrative medicine research · 2020Review
- A Network-Based Method for Mechanistic Investigation and Neuroprotective Effect on Post-treatment of Senkyunolid-H Against Cerebral Ischemic Stroke in Mouse.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Panax notoginseng Saponin Therapy for Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage, Meta-Analysis, and Mini Review of Potential Mechanisms of Action.Frontiers in neurology · 2014Article
- Evidence for a therapeutic effect of Braintone on ischemic brain damage.Neural regeneration research · 2013Article
- Evidence from the Cochrane Collaboration for Traditional Chinese Medicine therapies.Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) · 2009Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStroke, 88% of which are ischemic, is a common cause of death and disability all over the world. Chuanxiong has been reported to be beneficial in treating stroke. However, the strength of evidence to support its use is unclear.
objectivesTo assess the safety and efficacy of chuanxiong for acute ischemic stroke. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched January 2008), the Chinese Stroke Trials Register (last searched December 2007), the trials register of the Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field (last searched December 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2007), MEDLINE (1966 to December 2007), EMBASE (1980 to December 2007), CNKI (1979 to December 2007), AMED (1985 to December 2007) and CBM-disc (1979 to December 2007). We also handsearched appropriate journals and relevant conference proceedings and searched ongoing trials and research registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials comparing the clinical outcomes of chuanxiong with placebo or no treatment in patients with acute ischemic stroke (within 14 days of onset). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, four review authors interviewed study authors to confirm randomisation, and two review authors assessed trial quality, extracted and analysed data. MAIN
resultsTwo trials involving 161 participants were included. Both trials were of low quality. Neither of the trials reported the mortality rate or dependency of the participants and no reliable evidence is available in this review. AUTHORS'
conclusionsIn the two poor quality trials published, there is insufficient evidence to suggest any clinical recommendations. Well-designed and performed high-quality trials are needed.
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.