ArticleMedicine2020
Evidence for acupotomology in the management of cervical radiculopathy: 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultrasound-guided injection acupotomy as a minimally invasive intervention therapy for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: a randomized control trial.Annals of medicine · 2023Trial
- Needle knife therapy for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of methodology · 2026Article
- Needle-Knife Therapy Relieves Inflammation and Neuronal Apoptosis in Cervical Spondylotic Radiculopathy via IRE1α-XBP1 Signaling.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Precise diagnosis and management of non-traumatic radial nerve palsy attributed to multiple rare etiologies: case study and literature review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical radiculopathy (CR) describes compression or stimulation secondary to the cervical nerve root, 1 or 2 types of upper limb pain, and/or with neck. In clinical practice, both acupotomology and acupuncture are very widely and popular for the management of CR. So, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the efficacy, safety of acupotomology in the treatment of CR.
methodsWe will search the following databases from inception to the September 2019 : MEDLINE(PubMed), Web of Science(Thomson Reuters), Cochrane Library, Embase (Ovid, Elsevier), SinoMed, Clinical Trials. gov, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang database, and VIP database. We will apply no language restrictions. We will not use a randomized controlled trial filter in EMBASE, as the set of intervention terms will limit the results sufficiently. The randomised controlled trials of acupotomology versus acupuncture for CR; two independent researchers will use the bias risk tool provided by the Cochrane Collaboration to evaluate the quality of the literature using RevMan 5.3 software (Copenhagen, The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014).
resultsThis systematic review and meta-analysis will provide a synthesis of existing evidence-based medical evidence for acupotomology/ acupotomy/needle knife in the treatment of CR.
conclusionThe conclusions of this systematic review and meta-analysis will provide evidence to evaluate the effectiveness of acupotomology/ acupotomy/needle knife for CR and further guide clinical decision-making. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is based on literature and therefore does not require ethical approval or patient consent. The study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020172274.
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.