Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32438037›Full record

SynthesisPharmacological research2020

Efficacy and Safety of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine for Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ming Liu, Ya Gao, Yuan Yuan, Kelu Yang, Shuzhen Shi, Junhua Zhang, Jinhui Tian

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Pharmacological research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 123 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
123citing papers in PubMed, 15 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

123 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Herbal medicine for COVID-19: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analysis.Phytomedicine : international journal of phytotherapy and phytopharmacology · 2022
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

63 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ming LiuEvidence Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, China.
Ya GaoEvidence Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, China.
Yuan YuanWuwei Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Wuwei 733000, Gansu, China.
Kelu YangSchool of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000 Gansu, China.
Shuzhen ShiEvidence Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, China.
Junhua ZhangEvidence-Based Medicine Center, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 300193, Tianjin, China. Electronic address: zjhtcm@foxmail.com.
Jinhui TianEvidence Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, China. Electronic address: tjh996@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Corona virus disease (COVID-19) has now spread to all parts of the world and almost all countries are battling against it. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine (Hereinafter referred to as "Integrated Medicine") to COVID-19. We searched six major Chinese and English databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and case-control studies (CCSs) of Integrated Medicine on COVID-19. Two reviewers independently screened, identified studies, and extracted data. Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess the quality of included RCTs and CCSs, respectively. Stata (version 13.0; StataCorp) was used to perform meta-analyses with the random-effects model. Risk ratio (RR) was used for dichotomous data while the weighted mean difference (WMD) was adopted for continuous variables as effect size, both of which were demonstrated in effect size and 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 11 studies were included. Four were RCTs and seven were CCSs. The sample size of including studies ranged from 42 to 200 (total 982). The traditional Chinese medicine included Chinese medicine compound drugs (QingFei TouXie FuZhengFang) and Chinese patent medicine (e.g. Shufeng Jiedu Capsule, Lianhua Qingwen granules). Compared with the control group, the overall response rate [RR = 1.230, 95%CI (1.113, 1.359), P = 0.000], cure rate [RR = 1.604, 95%CI (1.181, 2.177), P = 0.002], severity illness rate [RR = 0.350, 95%CI (0.154, 0.792), P = 0.012], and hospital stay [WMD = -1.991, 95%CI (-3.278, -0.703), P = 0.002] of the intervention group were better. In addition, Integrated Medicine can improve the disappearance rate of fever, cough, expectoration, fatigue, chest tightness and anorexia and reduce patients' fever, and fatigue time (P < 0.05). This review found that Integrated Medicine had better effects and did not increase adverse drug reactions for COVID-19. More high-quality RCTs are needed in the future.

Indexed as

BetacoronavirusClinical MedicineCombined Modality TherapyCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19HumansMedicine, Chinese TraditionalPandemicsPneumonia, ViralSARS-CoV-2COVID-19EfficacyIntegrated Traditional Chinese and Western MedicineMeta-analysisSafety

Identifiers

PMID32438037
PMCPMC7211759

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.