Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25654379›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2015

Effects of traditional Chinese patent medicine on essential hypertension: a systematic review.

Xingjiang Xiong, Pengqian Wang, Yuqing Zhang, Xiaoke Li

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Aqueous extract ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Traditional Chinese Patent Medicine for Primary Hypertension: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Xingjiang XiongFrom the Department of Cardiology, Guang'anmen Hospital (XX); Institute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China (PW); Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada (YZ); and Bio-organic and Natural Products Laboratory, McLean Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Belmont, Massachusetts, USA (XL).
Pengqian Wang
Yuqing Zhang
Xiaoke Li
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNGuang’anmen Hospital · CNMcMaster University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditional Chinese patent medicine (TCPM) is widely used for essential hypertension (EH) in China. However, there is no critically appraised evidence, such as systematic reviews or meta-analyses, regarding the potential benefits and disadvantages of TCPM to justify their clinical use and recommendation. The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate and meta-analyze the effects of TCPM for EH. Seven databases, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Chinese Scientific Journal Database, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and the Wanfang Database, were searched from their inception to August 2014 for relevant studies that compared one TCPM plus antihypertensive drugs versus antihypertensive drugs alone. The methodological quality of the included trials was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The primary outcome measures were mortality or progression to severe complications and adverse events. The secondary outcome measures were blood pressure (BP) and quality of life (QOL). Seventy-three trials, which included 8138 patients, on 17 TCPMs were included. In general, the methodological quality was low. Two trials evaluated the effects of TCPMs on mortality and the progression to severe complications after treatment, and no significant difference was identified compared with antihypertensive drugs alone. No severe adverse events were reported. Thirteen TCPMs used in complementary therapy significantly decreased systolic BP by 3.94 to 13.50 mmHg and diastolic BP by 2.28 to 11.25 mmHg. QOL was significantly improved by TCPM plus antihypertensive drugs compared with antihypertensive drugs alone. This systematic review provided the first classification of clinical evidence for the effectiveness of TCPM for EH. The usage of TCPMs for EH was supported by evidence of class level III. As a result of the methodological drawbacks of the included studies, more rigorously designed randomized controlled trials that focus on mortality and cardiovascular events during long-term follow-up are warranted before TCPM can be recommended for hypertensive patients. Two TCPMs, Song ling xue mai kang capsules and Yang xue qing nao granules, should be prioritized for further research.

Indexed as

Blood PressureChinaDisease ProgressionEssential HypertensionHumansHypertensionMedicine, Chinese TraditionalQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID25654379
PMCPMC4602722
OpenAlexW2016439908

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.