Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22965698›Full record

ReviewChinese journal of integrative medicine2012

Establishing Chinese medicine characteristic tumor response evaluation system is the key to promote internationalization of Chinese medicine oncology.

Jie Li, Lei Li, Rui Liu, Hong-sheng Lin

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Chinese journal of integrative medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. pPeOncology letters · 2017
    Article
  9. Antitumor Effect of Zhihuang Fuzheng Soft Capsules on Tumor-Bearing Mice.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2016
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review on the Applications and Molecular Mechanisms of Xihuang Pill in Tumor Treatment.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2015
    Review
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.

Jie LiDepartment of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100053, China.
Lei Li
Rui Liu
Hong-sheng Lin

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The features and advantages of Chinese medicine (CM) in cancer comprehensive treatment have been in the spotlight of experts both at home and abroad. However, how to evaluate the effect of CM more objectively, scientifically and systematically is still the key problem of clinical trial, and also a limitation to the development and internationalization of CM oncology. The change of tumor response evaluation system in conventional medicine is gradually consistent with the features of CM clinical effect, such as they both focus on a combination of soft endpoints (i.e. quality of life, clinical benefit, etc.) and hard endpoints (i.e. tumor remission rate, time to progress, etc.). Although experts have proposed protocols of CM tumor response evaluation criteria and come to an agreement in general, divergences still exist in the importance, quantification and CM feature of the potential endpoints. Thus, establishing a CM characteristic and wildly accepted tumor response evaluation system is the key to promote internationalization of CM oncology, and also provides a more convenient and scientific platform for CM international cooperation and communication.

Indexed as

Evaluation Studies as TopicInternationalityMedicine, Chinese TraditionalHumansNeoplasmsReference StandardsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

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.