Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34136346›Full record

ReviewIntegrative medicine research2021

Clinical studies of traditional Japanese herbal medicines (Kampo): Need for evidence by the modern scientific methodology.

Ichiro Arai

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Integrative medicine research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Global research trends in traditional and complementary medicine for cancer supportive care: a bibliometric analysis (2000-2025).Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Review
  2. Duagnosis: Locating Clinical Uncertainty in the Diagnostic Framework.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

1 author.

Ichiro AraiDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Nihon Pharmaceutical University.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundJapanese Kampo medicine is a traditional medicine with roots in ancient Chinese medicine. Because traditional physicians had been abolished in Japan, the present mainstream of Kampo treatment is that physicians who learned modern Western medicine prescribe Kampo extract products based on Western medical diagnosis. This situation is different from that in other east Asian countries, and the physicians require scientific clinical evidence.

methodsClinical studies were searched from literature databases, clinical trial registry sites, and "Evidence Reports of Kampo Treatment (EKAT)" published by the Japan Society for Oriental Medicine.

resultsAt the approval of Kampo products, scientific clinical evidence was not required because they have a long-period experience as a decoction. However, in the 1990s, Kampo products became a subject for national reevaluation; double-blind and placebo-controlled clinical trials. At the time, a methodological foundation for conducting clinical assessments of Kampo medicines was established. From 2000 onwards, with the evidence-based medicine era, the field of Kampo medicine also saw many randomized controlled trials, and their evidence was collected and published as EKAT. In the 2010s, post-marketing clinical trials of Kampo products also had to be conducted in this environment due to the need for ethical and scientific assurance. Currently, there are numerous clinical trials of Kampo products being conducted with high-grade trial designs.

conclusionThe situation of Kampo clinical studies reflects the unique history and position of Kampo medical system and Kampo products in Japan.

Indexed as

Clinical studyClinical trial registryKampo medicineRandomized controlled trialReevaluation

Identifiers

PMID34136346
PMCPMC8181179

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.