ArticleMedicine2020
Assessment of clinical efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine for the management of primary dysmenorrhea in the UK: A protocol of systematic review.
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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to appraise the clinical efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) for the management of patients with primary dysmenorrhea (PD) in the UK.
methodsWe will comprehensively search electronic databases (Cochrane Library, PUBMED/MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, Web of Science, and CNKI) and additional resources for original articles on randomized controlled trials published in English, Chinese, German, Spanish, Korean and Japanese. Outcomes will be the pain intensity, pain duration, menstrual cramps, amount of bleeding, and severity of dysmenorrhea symptoms, quality of life, and adverse events. Two authors will independently check all citations, extract data, and assess study quality. All potential conflicts will be solved through discussion by consulting another experienced author. A narrative synthesis will summarize the characteristics and findings of eligible trials. If it is possible, we will also pool the data and carry out meta-analysis.
resultsThe available evidence of the clinical efficacy of TCM for the treatment of PD in UK will be assessed through outcome measurements.
conclusionThe findings of this study will determine whether or not TCM is effective and safe for the treatment of PD in UK. OSF REGISTRATION NUMBER:: osf.io/jyc95.
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.