ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2017
Practice of Comparative Effectiveness Research to Identify Treatment Characteristics of Similar Chinese Patent Medicine for Angina Pectoris.
Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- An emerging double‑edged sword role of ferroptosis in cardiovascular disease (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2025Review
- Qishen Yiqi Dripping Pills for Cardiovascular Diseases: Effects and Mechanisms.Chinese journal of integrative medicine · 2023Review
- Galectin-3 Mediated Inflammatory Response Contributes to Neurological Recovery by QiShenYiQi in Subacute Stroke Model.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- The Contribution of Different Components in QiShenYiQi Pills® to Its Potential to Modulate Energy Metabolism in Protection of Ischemic Myocardial Injury.Frontiers in physiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIndividualized application of TCM is not easy and may lead to undesirable results, such as poor effect or even adverse reactions. This trial aims to compare two common Chinese patent medicines with similar effects. BACKGROUND OF THE RESEARCH: Four hospitals carried out the test at the same time in Tianjin city of China.
participants144 patients were involved in this study; all patients must meet the diagnostic criteria.
interventionsQishen Yiqi pills, compound danshen pills, and their placebos; an efficacy analysis was conducted after the first medication and after crossover medication. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary index of end point includes Seattle Angina Questionnaire score-7 and score of 7-point Likert Scale; the curative effect was compared with minimal clinically important differences value.
resultTwo drugs have their respective advantages in treating SAP. In practical application, the two drugs shall be discriminated in use based on patients' specific symptoms.
trial registrationChinese clinical trials register is ChiCTR-TTRCC-14004406 (registered 23 March 2014).
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.