Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34015584›Full record

SynthesisBiomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie2021

Tibetan herbal pain-relieving plaster for low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mingxiao Yang, Susan Q Li, Colleen M Smith, Yi Lily Zhang, Ting Bao, Jun J Mao

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Biomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie, 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
1.6field-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. Trial
  3. Integrating herbal medicine into oncology care delivery: development, implementation, and evaluation of a novel program.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mingxiao YangMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, Bendheim Integrative Medicine Center, 1429 First Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA. Electronic address: yangm2@mskcc.org.
Susan Q LiMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, Bendheim Integrative Medicine Center, 1429 First Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA.
Colleen M SmithMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, Bendheim Integrative Medicine Center, 1429 First Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA.
Yi Lily ZhangMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, Bendheim Integrative Medicine Center, 1429 First Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA.
Ting BaoMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, Bendheim Integrative Medicine Center, 1429 First Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA.
Jun J MaoMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, Bendheim Integrative Medicine Center, 1429 First Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA. Electronic address: maoj@mskcc.org.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

ethnopharmacological relevanceTibetan traditional medicine CheeZheng Pain-Relieving Plaster (CZPRP) is frequently used as an over-the-counter external analgesic for musculoskeletal pain; however, its evidence for low back pain (LBP) has not been evaluated. AIM OF THE STUDY: This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of CZPRP for both acute, subacute and chronic LBP through a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials. MATERIALS AND

methodsPubMed, CENTRAL, CNKI, CQVIP, and Wanfang databases were searched through April 20, 2020 for randomized controlled trials of CZPRP for LBP. Eligible comparators were placebo, active treatment, or usual care. Clinical outcomes included pain severity, lower back function score, pain-free rate, and adverse events (AEs). Qualitative evaluations were conducted using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tools. Quantitative analyses were conducted using a random-effects model.

resultsThis study includes 1674 LBP patients from nine clinical studies. Pooled analyses among subjects with acute LBP show 1) significant pain reductions (mean difference -0.84, 95% confidence interval[CI] -1.31, -0.37) in CZPRP plus diclofenac versus diclofenac, 2) significant improvements in lower back function (standard mean difference -1.50, 95% CI -2.16, -0.85) in CZPRP versus diclofenac, and 3) a higher pain-free rate in CZPRP alone (risk ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.16, 1.89; I

conclusionsThe use of CZPRP is associated with improved acute LBP outcomes compared to diclofenac. However, due to the moderate to high risk of bias of the studies, future rigorous randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the effects of CZPRP for acute and chronic LBP.

Indexed as

Medicine, TraditionalAnalgesicsAnimalsDiclofenacHumansLow Back PainPlant PreparationsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTibetAnalgesicsDiclofenacPlant PreparationsCamphor-based external analgesicCheeZheng pain-relieving plasterEfficacyLow back painTibetan herbal formula

Identifiers

PMID34015584
PMCPMC9254726
OpenAlexW3162333176

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.