SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2022
Evidence of Chinese Herbal Medicine Use From an Economic Perspective: A Systematic Review of Pharmacoeconomics Studies Over Two Decades.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A qualitative systematic review and quality assessment of pharmacoeconomic evaluations on Chinese Herbal Medicine from 2020 to 2025.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Impact of China Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations on study quality: a systematic review of economic evaluations in China.Health economics review · 2025Review
- Establishment, maintenance and application effect analysis of the prescription pre-review system in a tertiary hospital in China.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of commercial Chinese polyherbal preparations for primary insomnia: based on network meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
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 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.