ArticleMedicine2020
Effectiveness of different acupuncture courses for functional constipation: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study will evaluate the effectiveness of different acupuncture courses for functional constipation (FC) through network meta-analysis.
methodsEight database (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Central), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) and Wanfang Database) will be searched from inception to October 2019. Only randomized controlled trials comparing different acupuncture courses or acupuncture versus sham acupuncture or placebo will be included. The outcomes involved weekly stool frequency, Bristol Fecal score, responder rate and safety evaluation. The risk of bias assessment and quality of evidence will be appraised using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines. RevMan 5.3 software, STATA V.14.0 and GeMTC software will be used to perform the network meta-analysis.
resultsThis work will compare and arrange the comparative efficacy of different acupuncture treatments for FC by summarizing the current evidences. The results will be submitted in the form of a journal publication.
conclusionThe results of this network meta-analysis may help doctors determine the best treatments for patients to manage FC. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020153801.
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.