Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26435725›Full record

ReviewEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2015

External Application of Traditional Chinese Medicine for Venous Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Xin Li, Qing-Qing Xiao, Kan Ze, Su Li, Yi-Fei Wang, Min Zhou, Qin-Tong Yang, Fu-Lun Li, Bin Li

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. 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

9 authors.

Xin LiDepartment of Dermatology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 200437, China.
Qing-Qing XiaoDepartment of Dermatology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 200437, China.
Kan ZeDepartment of Dermatology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 200437, China.
Su LiDepartment of Dermatology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 200437, China.
Yi-Fei WangDepartment of Dermatology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 200437, China.
Min ZhouDepartment of Dermatology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 200437, China.
Qin-Tong YangDepartment of Vessel, Shanghai TCM-Integrated Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 200082, China.
Fu-Lun LiDepartment of Dermatology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 200437, China.
Bin LiDepartment of Dermatology, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 200437, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective. To evaluate the effectiveness of external application of traditional Chinese medicine (EA-TCM) on venous ulcers. Methods. Seven databases were searched until April 2015 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of EA-TCM for venous ulcers. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Handbook guidelines. Study outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data or mean differences (MDs) for continuous data. Results. Sixteen of 193 potentially relevant trials met the inclusion criteria; however, their methodological qualities were low. Comparison of the same intervention strategies revealed significant differences in total effectiveness rates between EA-TCM and conventional therapy groups (RR = 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.16-1.29, and P < 0.00001). Compared to conventional therapy, EA-TCM combined with conventional therapy had a superior total effectiveness rate (RR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.04-1.19, and P = 0.003). There were no significant differences in recurrence rates during followup and final pain measurements between the experimental and those in the control groups (RR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.31-2.39, and P = 0.85; MD -0.75, 95% CI = -2.15-0.65, and P = 0.29). Conclusion. The evidence that EA-TCM is an effective treatment for venous ulcers is encouraging, but not conclusive due to the low methodological quality of the RCTs. Therefore, more high-quality RCTs with larger sample sizes are required.

Identifiers

PMID26435725
PMCPMC4576005

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.