Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27930547›Full record

ReviewMedicine2016

Modern researches on Blood Stasis syndrome 1989-2015: A bibliometric analysis.

Jiangquan Liao, Jie Wang, Yongmei Liu, Jun Li, Lian Duan, Guang Chen, Junyuan Hu

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Four Subgroups of Blood Stasis Syndrome Are Identified by Manifestation Cluster Analysis in Males.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2019
    Article
  9. Mechanism ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jiangquan LiaoGraduate School, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Chaoyang District Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Xicheng District, Beijing, China.
Jie Wang
Yongmei Liu
Jun Li
Lian Duan
Guang Chen
Junyuan Hu
Guang’anmen Hospital · CNBeijing University of Chinese Medicine · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBlood Stasis syndrome (BSS) is one of the major syndromes in Traditional East Asia medicine (TEAM). Modern research of BSS began in the late1980s.

methodsWe searched in PubMed for BSS-related articles published between 1989 and 2015. The publication information, study contents, and bibliometric indicators were documented and analyzed.

resultsMost of the BSS-related studies were conducted by Chinese researchers in China. The number of publications on BSS-related increased rapidly in recent years, so did the quality of them. The disease diversity of BSS-related studies increased along with the number of publications. Yet the academic influence of them remained on average low; further, the diagnostic criteria of BSS were not uniform.

conclusionsBSS-related studies have increased in quantity and quality, but there are limitations to them which require improvement in research productivity and academic influence.

Indexed as

Medicine, Chinese TraditionalBlood Coagulation DisordersDiagnosis, DifferentialHumans

Identifiers

PMID27930547
PMCPMC5266019
OpenAlexW2559884641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
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.