Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23935678›Full record

ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2013

An exploration of the needling depth in acupuncture: the safe needling depth and the needling depth of clinical efficacy.

Jaung-Geng Lin, Pei-Chi Chou, Heng-Yi Chu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Acupuncture Safety in Taiwan.Medical acupuncture · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Clinical Efficacy of Acupuncture on Rheumatoid Arthritis and Associated Mechanisms: A Systemic Review.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2018
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Jaung-Geng LinSchool of Chinese Medicine, College of Chinese Medicine, China Medical University, No.91 Hsueh-Shih Road, Taichung 40402, Taiwan.
Pei-Chi Chou
Heng-Yi Chu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective. To explore the existing scientific information regarding safe needling depth of acupuncture points and the needling depth of clinical efficacy. Methods. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), The National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases to identify relevant monographs and related references from 1991 to 2013. Chinese journals and theses/dissertations were hand searched. Results. 47 studies were recruited and divided into 6 groups by measuring tools, that is, MRI, in vivo evaluation, CT, ultrasound, dissected specimen of cadavers, and another group with clinical efficacy. Each research was analyzed for study design, definition of safe depth, and factors that would affect the measured depths. Depths of clinical efficacy were discussed from the perspective of de-qi and other clinical observations. Conclusions. Great inconsistency in depth of each point measured from different subject groups and tools exists. The definition of safe depth should be established through standardization. There is also lack of researches to compare the clinical efficacy. A well-designed clinical trial selecting proper measuring tools to decide the actual and advisable needling depth for each point, to avoid adverse effects or complications and promote optimal clinical efficacy, is a top priority.

Identifiers

PMID23935678
PMCPMC3722841

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.