Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29343984›Full record

ArticleJournal of pain research2018

Appropriateness of sham or placebo acupuncture for randomized controlled trials of acupuncture for nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yan Xiang, Jinyuan He, Rui Li

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pain research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03823456 (Self-acupressure for Cancer-related Symptom Cluster of Insomnia, Depression, and Anxiety in Cancer Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

NCT03823456 naunknown statusnot on this map

Self-acupressure for Cancer-related Symptom Cluster of Insomnia, Depression, and Anxiety in Cancer Patients: a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityRan2018 to 2019Enrolled114ConditionsInsomnia, Anxiety, DepressionArmsSelf-acupressure, Sham Self-acupressure
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Acupuncture for the Management of Low Back Pain.Current pain and headache reports · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yan XiangDepartment of Teaching, School of Acupuncture and Moxibustion and Tuina, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Jinyuan HeDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Rui LiDepartment of Teaching, School of Acupuncture and Moxibustion and Tuina, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Beijing University of Chinese Medicine · CNSun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: To establish whether sham acupuncture (SA) or placebo acupuncture (PA) is more efficacious for reducing low back pain (LBP) than other routine treatments and to discuss whether SA or PA is appropriate for randomized controlled trials of acupuncture for LBP. Methods: Six databases were searched on 31 May 2017. We included only randomized controlled trials of adults with LBP and lower back myofascial pain syndrome. The studies had at least two control arms: a sham-controlled acupuncture arm and a routine care or waiting list arm (people who did not receive acupuncture until the end of treatment). Trials were combined using meta-analysis methods when the data allowed statistical pooling. Pooled effect sizes were calculated by random effects models. Results: This review identified 7 trials (1768 participants); all were included in the meta-analysis. We found statistically significant differences in pain reduction post-intervention between SA or PA and routine care or a waiting list, with a standardized mean difference of -0.36 (95% CI -0.54 to -0.18; Conclusion: Compared with routine care or a waiting list, SA or PA was more efficacious for pain relief post-intervention. Concluding that SA or PA is appropriate for acupuncture research would be premature. Guidelines evaluating SA or PA control methods are needed to determine the specific effect of acupuncture over placebo.

Indexed as

acupuncturealternative medicinebackachescontrolled clinical triallumbagopain managementplacebos

Identifiers

PMID29343984
PMCPMC5749386
OpenAlexW2778559904

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.