ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2020
Therapeutic Effect of
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Ameliorative effect and potential mechanism of hyperoside on diabetic retinopathy.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Therapeutic effects of herbal medicines in different types of retinopathies: A systematic review.Avicenna journal of phytomedicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of
methodsIt was a randomized controlled clinical trial. The recruited eighty subjects with type 2 diabetic nonproliferative retinopathy were randomly divided into treatment group and control group. The two groups received basic treatments including control of blood glucose, blood pressure and blood lipid, management of diet, exercise and health education, and monitoring of relevant indicators. Additionally, the treatment group was given oral administration of
resultsThere were no significant differences of DR severity levels, ETDRS vision scores, macular retinal thicknesses such as cube average thickness (CAT), central subfield thickness (CST), and cube volume (CV), and serum VEGF levels between two groups before treatment. Meanwhile, there were no significant differences of demographic characteristics, case terminations, blood glucose, blood lipid, blood pressure, biochemical indicators of hepatorenal function, hypoglycemic drugs, hypotensive drugs, and other basic treatments between two groups during six months treatment. The present study suggested that the remission rate of DR and the ETDRS vision score in the treatment group were significantly higher than those of the control group (remission rate: 25.4% vs 9.3%,
conclusionThe study offered the novel evidence for the therapeutic effect of
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.