ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2020
Statement to an Insufficient Systematic Review on
Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mistletoe Extracts during the Oncological Perioperative Period: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Human Randomized Controlled Trials.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic analysis of mistletoe prescriptions in clinical studies.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Mistletoe in Cancer Cell Biology: Recent Advances.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Review
- Traditional Uses, Phytochemical Constituents and Ethnopharmacological Properties of Mistletoe from Phoradendron and Viscum Species.Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening · 2024Review
- The Antioxidant Activity of Mistletoes (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- The Anti-Inflammatory Activity ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Additional treatment with mistletoe extracts for patients with breast cancer compared to conventional cancer therapy alone - efficacy and safety, costs and cost-effectiveness, patients and social aspects, and ethical assessment.German medical science : GMS e-journal · 2022Review
- Combinational therapeutics to combat cancer.Bioinformation · 2021Article
- LianXia Formula Granule Attenuates Cardiac Sympathetic Remodeling in Rats with Myocardial Infarction via the NGF/TrKA/PI3K/AKT Signaling Pathway.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021Article
- Comprehensive Metabolome Analysis of Fermented Aqueous Extracts ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Article
- Anthroposophic Medicine: A Short Monograph and Narrative Review-Foundations, Essential Characteristics, Scientific Basis, Safety, Effectiveness and Misconceptions.Global advances in health and medicine · 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
10 authors at 9 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUp to 88% of oncological patients apply complementary therapies and up to 77% apply complementary mistletoe therapy in the context of integrative oncological approaches. An evidence-based consultation of oncological health professionals regarding complementary therapies used in Germany is missing. Therefore, a new S3-Guideline for Complementary Medicine in the Treatment of Oncological Patients is under development and is anticipated to be finalized in November 2020. It will be based on evidence-based publications and systematic reviews on complementary therapies in oncology. A recently published two-part systematic review on mistletoe treatment in oncology has been reevaluated.
methodsThe latest published systematic two-part review on mistletoe has been systematically proofread and checked in compliance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention and the AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) tool.
resultsThe here discussed two-part review is incomplete, lacks sound accuracy including insufficient assessment of the risk of bias, and contains imprecise statements. In addition, it does not sufficiently comply with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention and the AMSTAR 2 tool.
conclusionIn view of the approaching release of a new guideline in the field of complementary therapies in oncology, the present statement draws attention to a lack of profound methodology of conductance of a recently released systematic review on mistletoe. In consequence, a comprehensive overview of published mistletoe studies, i.e., a meta-analysis with a sound methodology of conductance, is necessary.
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.