Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31876740›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2019

Efficacy of herbal medicine (Gegen Qinlian Decoction) on ulcerative colitis: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Yuling Fan, Wen Yi, Han Huang, Zhigang Mei, Zhitao Feng

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Ulcer-Healing Effect of Hydroalcoholic Extract and Essential Oil ofInternational journal of preventive medicine · 2022
    Article
  11. Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Current Advances inFrontiers in pharmacology · 2021
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Yuling FanThird-Grade Pharmacological Laboratory on Chinese Medicine Approved by State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Medical College of China Three Gorges University.
Wen YiDepartment of Traditional Chinese Medicine, The First College of Clinical Medical Sciences, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, Hubei, China.
Han HuangThird-Grade Pharmacological Laboratory on Chinese Medicine Approved by State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Medical College of China Three Gorges University.
Zhigang MeiThird-Grade Pharmacological Laboratory on Chinese Medicine Approved by State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Medical College of China Three Gorges University.
Zhitao FengThird-Grade Pharmacological Laboratory on Chinese Medicine Approved by State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Medical College of China Three Gorges University.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy of Gegen Qinlian Decoction (GQD) for ulcerative colitis (UC).

methodsPubMed, EMBASE, Springer LINK, Cochrane Library, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chongqing Weipu Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals, Wan-fang Database, and Chinese Biomedicine Database were searched from their inception to December 2018 for randomized controlled trials comparing the use of GQD alone or in combination with western medicine (WM) with that of WM therapies for UC. Outcomes on the therapy's effectiveness rate, ulcerative colitis endoscopic index of severity (UCEIS), recurrence rate, and adverse events were extracted and analyzed by Review Manager 5.3 software. Meta-analysis was combined with fixed or random-effects model, and risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for all outcomes. Two researchers independently reviewed each trial to determine its inclusion. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used for quality assessment.

resultsWe included 22 trials involving 2028 patients with UC. When compared with WM therapy, GQD significantly improved the clinical effectiveness (n = 591, RR = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.12-1.31, P < .00001) and recurrence rate (n = 94, RR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.10-0.54, P = .0006). GQD plus WM was more effective in improving the clinical effectiveness (n = 1337, RR = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.16-1.27, P < .00001), and decreasing UCEIS scores (n = 384, mean difference  = -0.63, 95% CI: -1.26--0.01, P = .05), recurrence rate (n = 179, RR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.06-0.61, P = .006). In addition, the adverse events for GQD (n = 238, RR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.02-1.68, P = .14) and GQD plus WM (n = 427, RR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.15-0.90, P = .03) was significantly lower than that for WM alone. Noted adverse events primarily included gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, dizziness, and leukocytopenia.

conclusionsThis meta-analysis shows that GQD used alone or in combination with WM might have potential benefits in curing UC. However, there is no sufficient evidence to draw definite conclusion supporting the effect of GQD for UC due to poor methodological quality of the included trials. More rigorously designed investigations and studies with large sample sizes should be conducted to establish clinical evidence further.

Indexed as

Colitis, UlcerativeDrugs, Chinese HerbalHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeDrugs, Chinese Herbalgegenqinlian

Identifiers

PMID31876740
PMCPMC6946546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.