ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022
Development of a Core Outcome Set in the Clinical Trials of Traditional Chinese Medicine for Stroke: A Study Protocol.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Outcome selection of randomized controlled trials in acute stroke: a comparative analysis between traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Association between stroke and memory diseases: evidence from a prospective national cohort study in China.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Patients' knowledge, attitude, and practice toward stroke rehabilitation: a web-based cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Protocol of the development of a core outcome set for stroke in multidimensional value assessment of traditional Chinese medicine.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Developing a Core Outcome Set for Assessing Clinical Safety Outcomes of Prostate Cancer in Clinical Trials of Traditional Chinese Medicine: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Stroke, an acute cerebrovascular disease, is mainly caused by the sudden rupture or occlusion of blood vessels, and is subdivided into ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke. It has become the second leading cause of death worldwide. In Chinese clinical practice, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM)/Integrative Medicine has been widely used for the treatment of stroke. Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of TCM/Integrative Medicine for stroke have been conducted to improve the efficacy and safety outcomes. However, their conclusions should be treated with caution because of the methodological quality defects in the clinical research. Pervasive inconsistencies are present in the outcomes collected and reported across these studies, which may lead to the pooling of discrepant data and preclude meta-analysis. The issue could be addressed by developing a core outcome set (COS). Aim: The aim of this study is to develop a COS in the clinical trials of TCM/Integrative Medicine in the treatment of stroke. Method and Analysis: A steering group will be set up to organize and guide the development of the COS. The study contains three phases: (I) development of an initial outcome list covering all relevant outcomes, Ethics and Dissemination: This study has been granted by the Ethics Committee of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TJUTCM-EC20210003). When the COS is completed, we will publish it in an appropriate journal to promote further widespread use. Registration: This study has been registered at the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials initiative, COMET database (Registration #1678).
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.