Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28093383›Full record

Trial reportAcupuncture in medicine : journal of the British Medical Acupuncture Society2017

Effect of minimal acupuncture for infantile colic: a multicentre, three-armed, single-blind, randomised controlled trial (ACU-COL).

Kajsa Landgren, Inger Hallström

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · greenAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Acupuncture in medicine : journal of the British Medical Acupuncture Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

NCT01761331 phase2 / phase3completednot on this map

Acupuncture in Infantile Colic - a Three Armed Randomized Multi Center Trial Comparing Acupuncture in a Standardized Point, Acupuncture in Individually Chosen Points and no Acupuncture

TypeinterventionalSponsorLund UniversityRan2013 to 2015Enrolled147ConditionsInfantile ColicArmsAcupuncture
NCT05894798 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2050, after this paper: background citation

Acupuncture in Infantile Colic - A Randomised Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorRegion SkaneRan2050 to 2060Enrolled0ConditionsInfant, Newborn, Diseases, Colic, Infantile, AcupunctureArmsAcupuncture
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Acupuncture for the treatment of infantile colic.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Acupuncture for pediatric pain: The trend of evidence-based research.Journal of traditional and complementary medicine · 2020
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Approach to infantile colic in primary care.Singapore medical journal · 2019
    Article
  11. Infantile Colic: New Insights into an Old Problem.Gastroenterology clinics of North America · 2018
    Review
  12. Infant colic: mechanisms and management.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2018
    Review
  13. Acupuncture for Infantile Colic: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2018
    Review
  14. Pediatric Acupuncture Safety: A Scoping Review.Global advances in integrative medicine and health
    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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kajsa LandgrenFaculty of Medicine, Department of Health Science, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5595-5774
Inger HallströmFaculty of Medicine, Department of Health Science, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Lund University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence for treating infantile colic with acupuncture is contradictory.

aimTo evaluate and compare the effect of two types of acupuncture versus no acupuncture in infants with colic in public child health centres (CHCs).

methodsA multicentre, randomised controlled, single-blind, three-armed trial (ACU-COL) comparing two styles of acupuncture with no acupuncture, as an adjunct to standard care, was conducted. Among 426 infants whose parents sought help for colic and registered their child's fussing/crying in a diary, 157 fulfilled the criteria for colic and 147 started the intervention. All infants received usual care plus four extra visits to CHCs with advice/support (twice a week for 2 weeks), comprising gold standard care. The infants were randomly allocated to three groups: (A) standardised minimal acupuncture at LI4; (B) semi-standardised individual acupuncture inspired by Traditional Chinese Medicine; and (C) no acupuncture. The CHC nurses and parents were blinded. Acupuncture was given by nurses with extensive experience of acupuncture.

resultsThe effect of the two types of acupuncture was similar and both were superior to gold standard care alone. Relative to baseline, there was a greater relative reduction in time spent crying and colicky crying by the second intervention week (p=0.050) and follow-up period (p=0.031), respectively, in infants receiving either type of acupuncture. More infants receiving acupuncture cried <3 hours/day, and thereby no longer fulfilled criteria for colic, in the first (p=0.040) and second (p=0.006) intervention weeks. No serious adverse events were reported.

conclusionsAcupuncture appears to reduce crying in infants with colic safely. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01761331; Results.

Indexed as

Acupuncture TherapyAcupuncture PointsColicCryingFemaleHumansInfantMaleSingle-Blind MethodTreatment OutcomeACUPUNCTUREPAEDIATRICS

Identifiers

PMID28093383
PMCPMC5466913
OpenAlexW2572684364

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.