Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35141135›Full record

ReviewIntegrative medicine research2022

GRADE Methods in traditional medicine.

Jian-Ping Liu

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Integrative medicine research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
–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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. A Meta-analysis of Traditional Chinese Medicine constitution distribution in people with functional constipation.Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

1 author.

Jian-Ping LiuCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methods was developed to evaluate the quality of evidence and make recommendations, which has been widely adopted in clinical practice guidelines. The GRADE methods address the classification of outcomes, systematic collection, appraisal and synthesis of research evidence based on each outcome, evaluate the overall quality of the evidence, and making recommendations. This essay summarized the GRADE methods and its use in clinical practice guidelines of traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine as well as highlighting some of the challenges.

Indexed as

Clinical practice guidelineGrade methodsQuality of evidenceStrength of recommendationsTraditional medicine

Identifiers

PMID35141135
PMCPMC8814377

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.