Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33747103›Full record

ReviewEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2021

Herbal Medicine for Adult Patients with Cough Variant Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Yuan-Bin Chen, Johannah L Shergis, Zhen-Hu Wu, Xin-Feng Guo, Anthony L Zhang, Lei Wu, Fei-Ting Fan, Yin-Ji Xu, Charlie C Xue, Lin Lin

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Protective Effects ofEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Yuan-Bin ChenDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, The Second Clinical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1169-5904
Johannah L ShergisSchool of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1840-1617
Zhen-Hu WuDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, The Second Clinical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7163-679X
Xin-Feng GuoDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, The Second Clinical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2699-9740
Anthony L ZhangSchool of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0968-9380
Lei WuDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, The Second Clinical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8556-0343
Fei-Ting FanDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, The Second Clinical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4049-6779
Yin-Ji XuDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, The Second Clinical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9286-8207
Charlie C XueDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, The Second Clinical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6937-9088
Lin LinDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, The Second Clinical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9147-5516
Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CNRMIT University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHerbal medicine is commonly used by patients with chronic cough, but the role of herbal medicine for cough variant asthma (CVA) has not yet been clearly defined. For the first time, we performed a meta-analysis to integrate the current evidence of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on this topic and assess the efficacy of herbal medicine in adults with CVA.

methodsA comprehensive search was conducted in electronic databases to identify RCTs of herbal medicine for adult CVA. Cochrane systematic review methods were followed, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation was performed to evaluate the quality of evidence.

resultsTwenty-eight RCTs were included. Compared with placebo, moderate-quality evidence from two studies showed that herbal medicine was associated with reduced cough symptom score (CSS) (MD -1.15 points; 95% CI, -1.67 to -0.63) and visual analogue scale (VAS) (MD -1.76 points; 95% CI, -2.66 to -0.86). Compared with montelukast, low- to moderate-quality evidence from 11 studies indicated that herbal medicine was associated with improved Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ) (MD 2.38 points; 95% CI, 1.32 to 3.44), reduced CSS (SMD -0.81 points; 95% CI, -1.09 to -0.53), and VAS (MD -1.34 points; 95% CI, -1.82 to -0.86). There were no significant differences between herbal medicine and ICS plus bronchodilator.

conclusionsIn adults with CVA, herbal medicine may result in improved quality of life and reduced cough frequency and severity scores compared with placebo or montelukast. Herbal medicine was not better than ICS plus a bronchodilator but the evidence is very uncertain.

Identifiers

PMID33747103
PMCPMC7943289
OpenAlexW3135851570

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.