ArticlePloS one2021
Comparison of efficacy and safety of complementary and alternative therapies for essential hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Filgotinib Radiographic and Clinical Efficacy Versus Other JAK Inhibitors and Adalimumab in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis and Inadequate Response to Methotrexate: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Rheumatology and therapy · 2025Review
- The relationship between negative psychological state and quality of life among cardiovascular disease patients in China: the masking effect of abnormal dietary behavior.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEssential hypertension (EH) with anxiety or depression belongs to the category of psycho-cardiology. Hypertension is closely related to anxiety and depression. The adverse reactions of Western medicine are apparent and the compliance is poor. Supplementary and replacement therapies have accumulated rich experience in clinical practices, which can reduce side effects and improve clinical efficacy. This study intends to use the Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) analysis method for the first time to gather randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to complementary and alternative therapies in the treatment of hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder and rank efficacy and safety, to provide a reference basis for the treatment of hypertension with anxiety or depression disorder.
methodsAll randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and registered and ongoing trials of Chinese and English databases, related to supplementation and replacement therapies of EH with anxiety or depression disorder, published from initial state to February 2021, will be collected in the form of computer retrieval. Two researchers will independently screen the literature, extracting data, assessing bias risk and assessing heterogeneity. We will use software WinBUGS 1.4.3 and Stata 16.0 for pairwise meta-analysis and NMA to comprehensively evaluate various interventions. The quality of evidence will be evaluated through the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
resultsThis NMA will comprehensively compare and rank the efficacy and safety of a series of complementary and alternative therapies in treating EH with anxiety or depression disorder.
conclusionSupplementary and replacement therapies have accumulated rich experience of clinical practices in improving EH with anxiety or depression disorder. We expect that this NMA will guide practice and research by providing reliable evidence of evidence-based medicine for the treatment of EH with anxiety or depression disorder. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: INPLASY202120068.
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.