ArticleBMJ open2019
Acupotomy versus acupuncture for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultrasound-guided injection acupotomy as a minimally invasive intervention therapy for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: a randomized control trial.Annals of medicine · 2023Trial
- Needle-warming moxibustion alleviates pain in rats with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy by modulating the NF-κB/ROS/NLRP3 pathway.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Article
- Ultrasound-guided acupotomy: a paradigm shift toward precision and safety in carpal tunnel syndrome therapy.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Comparison between unilateral biportal endoscopic and percutaneous posterior endoscopic cervical keyhole surgery for patients with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison of clinical efficacy of posterior percutaneous endoscopic cervical discectomy versus unilateral biportal endoscopy key-hole techniques for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: a retrospective study with 2 years.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Article
- Effect of a Traction Exercise Neck Brace on Cervical Spondylopathy Radiculopathy: A Clinical Study and Finite Element Analysis.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021Article
- Thunder-fire moxibustion for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Trials · 2020Article
- Altered intrinsic brain activity and regional cerebral blood flow in patients with chronic neck and shoulder pain.Polish journal of radiology · 2020Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR) is the most common pattern of cervical spondylosis, which is a serious and common degenerative disease. Both acupotomy and acupuncture have been widely used clinically to treat CSR in China with satisfied efficacy. However, there is no systematic review comparing the effectiveness of these two therapies. The aim of this study is to compare the therapeutic efficacy and safety between acupotomy and acupuncture for patients with CSR to provide evidence for clinical practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The following electronic databases will be searched: Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure , China Biology Medicine disc, Wanfang Database and Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP). The randomised controlled trials of acupotomy versus acupuncture with/without additional treatment for CSR will be searched in the databases from their inception to December 2018 by two researchers independently. Visual analogue scale, symptom score and neck disability index will be assessed as the primary outcomes. The total effective rate, curative rate, adverse events and amount of rescue medication used will be assessed as the secondary outcomes. The Review Manager 5.3 will be used for meta-analysis and the evidence level will be assessed by using the method for Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Continuous outcomes will be presented as the weighted mean difference or standardised mean difference with 95% CI, whereas dichotomous data will be expressed as relative risk with 95% CI. If the included studies have existing heterogeneity (p<0.05), then a random-effects model will be used. Otherwise, we will calculate using a fixed-effects model. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required because no primary data are collected. This review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at an international academic conference for dissemination. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019117348.
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.