Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28591176›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2017

Moxibustion treatment for primary osteoporosis: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Fanping Xu, Minghua Huang, Yi Jin, Qingzhe Kong, Zhongmin Lei, Xu Wei

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. [Moxibustion Inhibits Postmenopausal Bone Loss by Regulating the Metabolism of Gut Microbiota-Related Serotonin].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fanping XuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated to Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Minghua HuangDepartment of Orthopaedics, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated to Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yi JinDepartment of Orthopaedics, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated to Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Qingzhe KongDepartment of Orthopaedics, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated to Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Zhongmin LeiDepartment of Orthopaedics, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated to Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xu WeiDepartment of Scientific Research, Wangjing hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6723-9604
Capital Medical University · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Primary osteoporosis (POP) has a serious impact on quality of life for middle-aged and elderly, which particularly increase the risk of fracture. We conducted the systematic review to evaluate the effects of moxibustion for POP in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Eight databases were searched from their inception to July 30, 2016. The RCTs reporting the moxibustion as a monotherapy or in combination with conventional therapy for POP were enrolled. The outcomes might be fracture incidence, quality of life, clinical symptoms, death attributed to osteoporosis, adverse effect, bone mineral density (BMD), and biochemical indicators. Literature selection, data abstraction, quality evaluation, and data analysis were in accordance with Cochrane standards.Thirteen trials including 808 patients were included. Meta-analysis was not conducted because of the obvious clinical or statistical heterogeneity. Limited evidence suggested that moxibustion plus anti-osteoporosis medicine might be more effective in relieving the pain (visual analogue scale scores average changed 2 scores between groups, 4 trials), increasing the BMD of femoral neck (average changed 0.4 g/cm2 between groups, 3 trials), and improving the level of bone gla protein, osteoprotegerin and bone alkaline phosphatase (2 trials) compared with anti-osteoporosis medicine alone. However, the quality of previous studies was evaluated as generally poor. The safety evidence of moxibustion was still insufficient. Due to the paucity of high-quality studies, there was no definite conclusion about the efficacy and safety of moxibustion treating POP although parts of positive results were presented. Future research should pay attention to the dose-response relation and fracture incidence of moxibustion for POP.

Indexed as

MoxibustionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAcupuncture PointsBone DensityHumansOsteoporosisPain MeasurementPublication BiasQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID28591176
PMCPMC5462379
OpenAlexW2624566424

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.