ArticleMedicine2019
A comparison of the efficacy of Chinese herbal medicines in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea: A network meta-analysis protocol.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- To explore the mechanism of acupoint application in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea by 16S rDNA sequencing and metabolomics.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Article
- Insight into Dysmenorrhea Research from 1992 to 2022: A Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of pain research · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionChinese herbal medicines (CHM) have been commonly used in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea in East Asia. Several systematic reviews have been conducted to assess the clinical efficacy of CHM in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea. However, their comparative efficacy is still unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) to systematically compare the advantages of different CHM in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The following electronic databases will be searched in this study: Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Scientific Journal Database, and Wan-fang Database. Search terms include (Chinese herbal medicine or Chinese patent medicine or medicinal plants or phytotherapy or traditional medicine or Chinese herbal drugs or plant extracts or herbal medicine or herbal extract or herb or traditional Chinese medicine) and (primary dysmenorrhea or dysmenorrhea or painful menstruation) and (randomized controlled trial). The language will be limited to Chinese and English, and the search date will be up to May 2019. The included studies must be randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with patients diagnosed with primary dysmenorrhea. CHM must be used as interventions in the experimental group. While in the control group, studies that used a different herbal medicine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), or placebo will be included. The primary outcomes include clinical efficacy and visual analog scale (VAS), and the secondary outcomes include adverse events and quality of life. Four reviewers will independently extract the data and assess the qualities of the studies. Statistical analysis will be conducted with R package for each outcome. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as this NMA is based on published studies. The completed NMA will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42018095254.
Indexed as
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.