Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23983801›Full record

ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2013

Is deqi an indicator of clinical efficacy of acupuncture? A systematic review.

Shuo Zhang, Wei Mu, Lu Xiao, Wen-Ke Zheng, Chun-Xiang Liu, Li Zhang, Hong-Cai Shang

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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

7 authors.

Shuo ZhangCenter for Evidence-Based Medicine, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 312 Anshanxi Road, Nankai District, Tianjin 300193, China.
Wei Mu
Lu Xiao
Wen-Ke Zheng
Chun-Xiang Liu
Li Zhang
Hong-Cai Shang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective. Despite the systematic literature review of the current evidence, we aim to answer the question " is Deqi an indicator of clinical effects in acupuncture treatment?" Methods. We systematically searched CNKI, VIP, Wanfang Data, PubMed, Embase, and the CENTRAL for three types of study: (1) empirical research probing into the role of Deqi in acupuncture; (2) mechanism studies examining the effect of Deqi on physiological parameters in animal models and human subjects; (3) clinical studies that compared the outcome of acupuncture with Deqi with that of acupuncture without Deqi. Two reviewers independently extracted data, undertook qualitative or quantitative analysis, and summarized findings. Results. The ancient Chinese acupuncturists valued the role of Deqi as a diagnostic tool, a prognosis predictor, and a necessary part of the therapeutic procedure. Findings from modern experimental research provided preliminary evidence for the physiological mechanism that produced Deqi. Few clinical studies generated conflicting evidence of the comparative effectiveness of acupuncture with Deqi versus acupuncture without Deqi for a variety of conditions. Conclusion. The current evidence base is not solid enough to draw any conclusion regarding the predicative value of natural Deqi for clinical efficacy or the therapeutic value of manipulation-facilitated Deqi.

Identifiers

PMID23983801
PMCPMC3747467

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.