ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2021
Scientific Evidence of Xuebijing Injection in the Treatment of Sepsis.
Article 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, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effects of different dosages/frequency of Xuebijing injection (a Chinese patent) for sepsis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Therapeutic efficacy and mechanisms of Xuebijing inFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Targeting Ferroptosis in Sepsis: Therapeutic Potential and Mechanisms of Natural Products and Traditional Chinese Medicine.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Review
- Xuebijing Injection Alleviates Sepsis-Induced Acute Lung Injury by Inhibition of Cell Apoptosis and Inflammation Through the Hippo Pathway.Journal of inflammation research · 2025Article
- Efficacy of Xuebijing Combined with Ulinastatin in the Treatment of Traumatic Sepsis and Effects on Inflammatory Factors and Immune Function in Patients.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo systematically collate, appraise, and synthesize the current evidence on the Xuebijing injection (XBJI) for sepsis.
methodsEight databases were searched for systematic reviews (SRs) or meta-analyses (MAs) on XBJI for sepsis. Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2), Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methods were used to assess the methodological quality, reporting quality, and evidence quality of the enrolled studies, respectively.
resultsOut of the 13 studies that were included, all studies were rated critically low quality based on AMSTAR-2 results. Based on the results obtained from PRISMA, all studies were reported to be over 80%, while the GRADE system yielded three outcome measures rated high-quality, 16 were of moderate quality, and the rest were of low or critically low quality.
conclusionsThe combination of XBJI and Western medicine (WM) showed significant synergy for the treatment of sepsis compared to WM alone. However, this conclusion should be treated with caution since the quality of the SRs/MAs providing the evidence was relatively low.
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.