ArticleSystematic reviews2013
Bibliometric and content analysis of the Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field specialized register of controlled trials.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 6 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Chinese herbal medicine for the treatment of children with cerebral palsy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with core herbs exploration.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Reporting quality and risk of bias of randomized controlled trials of Chinese herbal medicine for multiple sclerosis.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Pooled it
- Yoga for treating urinary incontinence in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- The quantity and quality of complementary and alternative medicine clinical practice guidelines on herbal medicines, acupuncture and spinal manipulation: systematic review and assessment using AGREE II.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2016Pooled it
- Associated Factors and Consequences of Risk of Bias in Randomized Controlled Trials of Yoga: A Systematic Review.PloS one · 2015Pooled it
- Use of Kampo diagnosis in randomized controlled trials of Kampo products in Japan: a systematic review.PloS one · 2014Pooled it
- Online scientific research on placentophagy: a bibliometric analysis.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2024Review
- Trends and hotspots related to traditional and modern approaches on acupuncture for stroke: A bibliometric and visualization analysis.Medicine · 2023Article
- A comprehensive search string informed by an operational definition of complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine for systematic bibliographic database search strategies.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2022Article
- Operational definition of complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine derived from a systematic search.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2022Article
- Information Survey on the Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials of HuatuoZaizao pill for stroke.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Exploring the "gene-protein-metabolite" network of coronary heart disease with phlegm and blood stasis syndrome by integrated multi-omics strategy.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Randomized Controlled Trials of Mindfulness and Acceptance-Based Interventions Over the Past Two Decades: A Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) · 2021Article
- Clinical studies of traditional Japanese herbal medicines (Kampo): Need for evidence by the modern scientific methodology.Integrative medicine research · 2021Review
- Insight into the characteristics of research published in traditional, complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine journals: a bibliometric analysis.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2021Article
- eHealth technologies assisting in identifying potential adverse interactions with complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) or standalone CAM adverse events or side effects: a scoping review.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2020Article
- Barriers to the registration and conduct of Cochrane systematic reviews of traditional East Asian medicine therapies.European journal of integrative medicine · 2019Article
- Standard Protocol Items for Clinical Trials with Traditional Chinese Medicine 2018: Recommendations, Explanation and Elaboration (SPIRIT-TCM Extension 2018).Chinese journal of integrative medicine · 2019Article
- Yoga for treatment of urinary incontinence in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe identification of eligible controlled trials for systematic reviews of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) interventions can be difficult. To increase access to these difficult to locate trials, the Cochrane Collaboration Complementary Medicine Field (CAM Field) has established a specialized register of citations of CAM controlled trials. The objective of this study is to describe the sources and characteristics of citations included in the CAM Field specialized register.
methodsBetween 2006 and 2011, regular searches for citations of CAM trials in MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were supplemented with contributions of controlled trial citations from international collaborators. The specialized register was 'frozen' for analysis in 2011, and frequencies were calculated for publication date, language, journal, presence in MEDLINE, type of intervention, and type of medical condition.
resultsThe CAM Field specialized register increased in size from under 5,000 controlled trial citations in 2006 to 44,840 citations in 2011. Most citations (60%) were from 2000 or later, and the majority (71%) were reported in English; the next most common language was Chinese (23%). The journals with the greatest number of citations were CAM journals published in Chinese and non-CAM nutrition journals published in English. More than one-third of register citations (36%) were not indexed in MEDLINE. The most common CAM intervention type in the register was non-vitamin, non-mineral dietary supplements (e.g., glucosamine, fish oil) (34%), followed by Chinese herbal medicines (e.g., Astragalus membranaceus, Schisandra chinensis) (27%).
conclusionsThe availability of the CAM Field specialized register presents both opportunities and challenges for CAM systematic reviewers. While the register provides access to thousands of difficult to locate trial citations, many of these trials are of low quality and may overestimate treatment effects. When including these trials in systematic reviews, adequate analysis of their risk of bias is of utmost importance.
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.