ArticleChinese journal of integrative medicine2020
A Reflection on the 2017 Nobel Prize for Physiology and Chinese Medicine.
Article in Chinese journal of integrative medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research on the molecular mechanisms controlling circadian rhythm in Western medicine is comparable to the study of a day-night rhythm in Chinese medicine (CM), as also focus on the same life phenomenon. By comparing the two, this paper elaborates on the differences between them in their respective issues of consciousness, ways of thinking, research methods and research results. Relatively speaking, Nobel Prize research has a stronger sense of the problems and concerns about the essence of "what", while CM focuses on "how a thing functions". The former mainly adopts experimental and mathematical methods, while the latter primarily depends on observation and understanding. The natural philosophy and natural science eventually lead to the results and the inevitable, quantitative and qualitative differences. Research on the life rhythm in CM should be proposed, scientific problems should be fully grasped, and research should be carried out with the aid of multidisciplinary new knowledge and new achievements through cross-disciplinary studies. On the basis of clinical epidemiological research and experimental research, a systematic review should be made of the human physiology of CM and the pathological rhythm model to explore the regulatory mechanism of time rhythm and create a new theory of time medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31385220What 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.