SynthesisMedicine2019
A systematic review of the effectiveness and safety of Chinese herbal medicine formula Gualou Xiebai Banxia (GLXBBX) decoction for the treatment of stable angina pectoris.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04270071 (Efficacy and Safety of Yangxin Shengmai Granules for the Treatment of Stable Angina Pectoris), which is not on this 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.
Efficacy and Safety of Yangxin Shengmai Granules for the Treatment of Stable Angina Pectoris: Randomised, Double Blind, Placebo Controlled Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The traditional Chinese medicines treat chronic heart failure and their main bioactive constituents and mechanisms.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2023Review
- Flavonoids fromChinese medicine · 2020Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA growing number of studies suggest that Gualou Xiebai Banxia (GLXBBX) decoction, a well-known Chinese herbal formula, has beneficial effects on eliminating angina pectoris symptoms and improving condition of stable angina pectoris (SAP) patients. However, whether this treatment is effective and safe for SAP or not, evidence supporting the effectiveness and safety of this treatment is still incomplete. Besides, there is lack of systematic review to assess the detailed situation (including risk of bias and methodology) of current related clinical studies. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of GLXBBX in treating SAP.
methodsThe major databases (MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Scientific Journals Database (VIP) Database, Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM), Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System (SinoMed), and Wanfang Database) were searched from inception to March 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of GLXBBX alone or combined with conventional drugs against conventional drugs for SAP were identified. Two assessors reviewed each trial independently. The methodological quality of the eligible studies was evaluated according to the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. Both the data extraction and the literature quality screening evaluation were conducted independently by 2 researchers.
resultTotally 17 clinical RCTs were included in this study, involving 1676 patients. Due to the high probability of bias of the included studies, it was inappropriate to undertake a meta-analysis. Thus, we only conducted a systematic review and mainly discussed the methodology and limitation of the included studies.
conclusionAlthough the current evidence prompted that GLXBBX might benefit SAP patients in improvement of angina pectoris, ECG, and blood lipid on a certain extent, this systematic review revealed no definite conclusion about the application of GLXBBX for SAP due to the poor methodological quality, high risk of bias, and inadequate reporting on clinical data. More rigorous, multicenter, sufficient-sample, and double-blind randomized clinical trials are warranted.
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.