ArticleBMJ open2019
Effectiveness and safety of oral Chinese patent medicines as adjuvant treatment for unstable angina pectoris on the national essential drugs list of China: a protocol for a systematic review and network 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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acupuncture therapies for cancer-related fatigue: A Bayesian network meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Mechanism of Jianpi Qingchang Huashi Recipe in treating ulcerative colitis: A study based on network pharmacology and molecular docking.World journal of clinical cases · 2021Article
- Acupuncture methods for allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and bayesian meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Chinese medicine · 2020Review
- Curcumin, a Multi-Ion Channel Blocker That Preferentially Blocks Late NaFrontiers in physiology · 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
11 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAchieving efficacious and safe treatments for unstable angina pectoris (UAP) is still a challenging clinical problem. The availability of different oral Chinese patent medicines frequently poses a practical challenge to clinicians, namely, which one to choose as first-line regimen for treatment. This study aims to examine the comparative effectiveness and safety of oral Chinese patent medicines for UAP on the national essential drugs list of China. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) of all randomised controlled trials to evaluate the use of oral Chinese patent medicines as adjuvant for the treatment of UAP. We will explore eight electronic databases from their inception to June 2018 and search for grey literature. Primary outcomes include mortality and the cardiovascular events. Secondary outcomes include: (1) symptom improvement; (2) ECG improvement; (3) frequency of acute angina attack; (4) duration of angina; (5) adverse effects. Two independent authors will screen titles and abstracts, review full texts, extract data, assess the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and assess the quality of evidence and strength of the recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). If adequate data are available, NMA will be performed with Bayesian analysis methods. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The NMA will help us to reduce the uncertainty of interventions and help clinicians to make optimal and more accurate therapeutic decisions for adults with UAP. Therefore, we will publish the findings of this study in a peer-reviewed journal. No ethics approval is necessary for this study based on the nature of its design. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018092822.
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.