Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34012475›Full record

ReviewEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2021

Xiao Chai Hu Tang for Peptic Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Min Li, Wenchao Dan, Hui Zhang, Yong'en Yun, Qingyong He

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Min LiDepartment of Cardiology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100053, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6019-2716
Wenchao DanDepartment of Cardiology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100053, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0188-8262
Hui ZhangDepartment of Cardiology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100053, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8142-8142
Yong'en YunDepartment of Cardiology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100053, China.
Qingyong HeDepartment of Cardiology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100053, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5885-8005
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNBeijing University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A peptic ulcer (PU) is a digestive disorder most commonly found in clinical practice. An oriental herbal formula, Xiao Chai Hu Tang (XCHT), has been used to treat PU for an extended period in China. The effectiveness and safety of XCHT in treating peptic ulcers was evaluated using a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Studies were systematically retrieved from CNKI, Embase, Medline, PubMed, SinoMed, VIP, Wanfang, and Web of Science. The following information was extracted from the relevant RCTs: the clinical efficacy rate, recurrence rate, clinical efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine, and the adverse effects. 13 RCTs, including 1334 patients, were included in this review. The meta-analysis showed that treatment with XCHT was superior to conventional pharmacotherapy (CPT) in improving the clinical efficacy rate (RR: 1.20, 95% confidence intervals (CIs): 1.08-1.34,

Identifiers

PMID34012475
PMCPMC8105105
OpenAlexW3159414435

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.