ReviewEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2020
The Efficacy and Safety of Simple-Needling Therapy for Treating Ankylosing Spondylitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review 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 8 papers, 3 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of acupuncture therapy on the symptoms and immune indicators of ankylosing spondylitis.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of acupuncture in the management of ankylosing spondylitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis with insights.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of Efficacy of Acupuncture-Related Therapy in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Unmet Needs in Spondyloarthritis: Pathogenesis, Clinical Trial Design, and Nonpharmacologic Therapy.The Journal of rheumatology · 2024Review
- Assessment of complementary and alternative medicine methods in the management of ankylosing spondylitis, rheumatoid arthritis, and fibromyalgia syndrome.Rheumatology international · 2023Review
- TCM nonpharmacological interventions for ankylosing spondylitis: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis.Medicine · 2021Article
- The effect of electronic moxibustion combined with rehabilitation nursing on the lumbar pain and stiffness of ankylosing spondylitis patients.American journal of translational research · 2021Article
- Chinese herbal medicine Yanghe decoction for ankylosing spondylitis: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical investigators have found that the use of needling in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) has a good clinical application prospect in recent years. However, these studies were insufficient to provide evidence for the efficacy and safety of simple-needling for AS. So, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of simple-needling for treating AS.
methodsWe searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Wangfang database (Wanfang), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), and any other gray literature sources for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used simple-needling to treat AS before June 2019 with the language restriction of Chinese and English. Researchers evaluated the retrieved literature studies and extracted valid data according to relevant requirements and used RevMan5.3 software for meta-analysis.
resultsA total of 10 studies were included, all of which were Chinese literature studies, involving 729 patients. Compared with the control groups, simple-needling groups had a better effect on the clinical effective rate (RR = 1.20, 95% CI (1.11, 1.29),
conclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that simple-needling was effective as an intervention for AS. However, due to the low quality of the methodology of included studies, the designs of clinical trials were not rigorously standardized. Therefore, it is necessary to carry out multiquality RCTs for verification.
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.