ArticleMedicine2020
Salvia miltiorrhiza improves Alzheimer's disease: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Translational potential of medicinal plants for Alzheimer's disease: integrated evidence from molecular mechanisms to preclinical and clinical findings.Natural products and bioprospecting · 2026Review
- SmilODB: a multi-omics database for the medicinal plant danshen (Frontiers in plant science · 2025Article
- Review
- Editorial: Emerging contaminants and their effect on agricultural crops.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Article
- Simultaneous Determination of Seven Lipophilic and Hydrophilic Components inMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlzheimer's disease (AD) is an age-related neurodegenerative disease that is slowly becoming a global problem. Salvia miltiorrhiza (SM) has a history of thousands of years of use in China. In recent years, SM has been reported to have the effect of improving Alzheimer's disease. However, there is no systematic review of its efficacy and safety yet. Therefore, we propose a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SM for AD patients.
methodsSix databases will be searched: China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Biological Medicine (CBM), China Scientific Journals Database (CSJD), Wanfang database, PubMed, and EMBASE. The information is searched from January 2010 to July 2020. Languages are limited to English and Chinese. The primary outcomes include changes in the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) and Activities of Daily Living scale (ADL). Additional outcomes include clinical effective rate and adverse event rate. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system will be used to assess the strength of the evidence.
resultsThis systematic review will evaluate the efficacy and safety of SM in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease.
conclusionThis systematic review provides evidence as to whether SM is effective and safe for Alzheimer's disease patients. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: INPLASY202070066.
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.