ArticlePatient preference and adherence2016
Efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine for chronic prostatitis associated with damp-heat and blood-stasis syndromes: a meta-analysis and literature review.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bushen Daozhuo Granules Alleviate Chronic Non-Bacterial Prostatitis in Rats through p38 MAPK and Akt Signaling Pathways Based on Tandem Mass Tag-Based Quantitative Proteomics and Network Pharmacology Analyses.Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening · 2026Article
- The efficacy of Chinese herbal medicine on anxiety and depression in patients with chronic prostatitis complicated by sexual dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Comparative Efficacy of Oral Chinese Patent Medicine for Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome With Sexual Dysfunction: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- The effect of Jiedu Huoxue decoction on rat model of experimental nonbacterial prostatitis via regulation of miRNAs.Pharmaceutical biology · 2020Article
- Persistent Urethral Burning Without Identifiable Infection: A Case Report Highlighting Diagnostic Challenges and Integrative Symptom-Oriented Management.American journal of men's healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this meta-analysis and systematic review is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for chronic prostatitis (CP) associated with damp-heat and blood-stasis syndromes.
methodsAn electronic search of 13 databases up to May 2016 was screened to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the safety and efficacy of CHM for the treatment of CP associated with damp-heat and blood-stasis syndromes. Studies reporting on effective rates, adverse events, National Institutes of Health chronic prostatitis symptom index (NIH-CPSI) scores, and symptom index of Chinese medicine for chronic prostatitis (SI-CM) scores as outcomes were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed by fixed- or random-effect models using the Review Manager software.
resultsThirteen articles with the modified Jadad score ≥4 were identified. It was found that CHM was superior to placebo in increasing the efficacy (odds ratio: 6.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.78-9.48,
conclusionOur novel analysis demonstrates that CHM ranks highest in terms of improvement of CP associated with damp-heat and blood-stasis syndromes. While Prostant showed some efficacy in this disorder, it was associated with a smaller reduction in NIH-CPSI scores. In conclusion, CHM monotherapy is safe and effective for the treatment of CP associated with damp-heat and blood-stasis syndromes.
Indexed as
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.