ArticleMedicine2019
Shen fu injection for patients with septic shock: Protocol for an updated systematic review.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Shenfu injection as treatment for critical illness: a narrative review of clinical trials.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Review
- The therapeutic effects of traditional chinese medicine on COVID-19: a narrative review.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeptic shock is a serious disease with high morbidity, which will lead to organ dysfunction. Shen fu injection (SFI) has been widely used for septic shock as a treatment in China. Many clinical trials have been reported that it could assess the efficacy and safety of SFI to cure septic shock and accelerate resuscitation. Reassessing the efficacy and safety of SFI as a treatment of patients with septic shock is the objective of this updated systematic review.
methodsThe following electronic databases major in English and Chinese will be conducted a systematic search until September 2018: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database, Chinese BioMedical Literature Database, and Wan-fang Database. Randomized controlled trials of SFI will be included. Review Manager 5.2 software will be used for assessment of risk of bias, data synthesis, and subgroup analysis. We will conduct the GRADE system to assess the quality of evidence, if possible.
resultsThis study will provide a rational synthesis of current evidences for SFI on septic shock.
conclusionWe hope our research results will provide an objective and reliable evidence to patients, clinicians and healthcare policymakers who are concerning the treatment options of SFI in septic shock. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016049332.
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.