ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2015
Nao-Xue-Shu Oral Liquid Improves Aphasia of Mixed Stroke.
Article 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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Treatment of Cerebral Hemorrhage with NaoXueShu Oral Liquid.BioMed research international · 2017Pooled it
- Treatment of Naoxueshu Promotes Improvement of Hematoma Absorption and Neurological Function in Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage Patients.Frontiers in physiology · 2018Article
- Nao-Xue-Shu Oral Liquid Protects and Improves Secondary Brain Insults of Hypertensive Cerebral Hemorrhage.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective. The objective is to observe whether the traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) Nao-Xue-Shu oral liquid improves aphasia of mixed stroke. Methods. A total of 102 patients with aphasia of mixed stroke were divided into two groups by a single blind random method. The patients treated by standard Western medicine plus Nao-Xue-Shu oral liquid (n = 58) were assigned to the treatment group while the remaining patients treated only by standard Western medicine (n = 58) constituted the control group. Changes in the Western Aphasia Battery (WAB), Modified Rankin Scale (mRS), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), and hemorheology parameters were assessed to evaluate the effects of the treatments. Results. Excluding the patients who dropped out, 54 patients in the treatment group and 51 patients in the control group were used to evaluate the effects. Significant and persistent improvements in the WAB score, specifically comprehension, repetition, naming, and calculating, were found in the treatment group when the effects were evaluated at the end of week 2 and week 4, respectively, compared with baseline. The naming and writing scores were also improved at the end of week 4 in this group. The comprehension and reading scores were improved at the end of week 4 in the control group compared with the baseline, but the improvements were smaller than those in the treatment group. The percentages of patients at the 0-1 range of mRS were increased at the end of week 2 and week 4 in both groups, but the improvements in the treatment group were much larger than those in the control group. Greater improvements in the NIHSS scores and the hemorheology parameters in the treatment group were also observed compared with the control group at the end of week 2 and week 4. Conclusion. Nao-Xue-Shu oral liquid formulation improved aphasia in mixed stroke patients and thus might be a potentially effective drug for treating stroke aphasia.
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.