SynthesisMedicine2022
Clinical efficacy of Wenjing decoction in the treatment of ovulatory disorder infertility: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Under Chronic, High-Dose Administration of Wenjing Decoction, the Activation of the Hepatic Nrf2/HO-1 Pathway Mediates Increased Bilirubin Levels and Associated Reversible Neurologic Dysfunction in Mice.Journal of toxicology · 2026Article
- Liangfang Wenjing decoction regulates endoplasmic reticulum stress-mediated apoptosis to alleviate uterine microvascular injury in cold-stressed rats.Frontiers in pharmacology · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWenjing decoction (WJD) was widely used in the treatment for ovulatory disorder infertility (ODI) in China, while its efficacy was not clearly known. In this study, we evaluated the clinical efficacy of WJD by meta-analysis.
methodsEight electronic databases including Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang Data, VIP Database, and China Biology Medicine were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from the inception of each database to July 1, 2021, of which the interventions involve WJD and clomiphene. Outcomes included clinical efficacy rate, pregnancy rate, ovulation rate, dominant follicle diameter, endometrial thickness, estradiol, follicle-stimulating hormone, and luteinizing hormone. Meta-analysis and risk of bias were performed by RevMan 5.3 software.
resultsEleven RCTs including 915 patients, of which 476 in the intervention group and 439 in the control group. Meta-analysis showed that WJD was better than clomiphene for patients with ODI in terms of clinical effective rate (odds ratio [OR] = 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-1.34), pregnancy rate (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.15-2.07), ovulation rate (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.07-1.67), endometrial thickness (mean difference [MD] = 1.50, 95% CI: 0.90-2.10), and dominant follicle diameter (MD = 1.85, 95% CI: 0.68-3.02). The estradiol level (MD = 91.0, 95% CI: 80.3-101.88) in patients taking WJD was significantly higher than those taking clomiphene, while the follicle-stimulating hormone level (MD = -0.93, 95% CI: -1.13 to -0.72) and the luteinizing hormone level (MD = -4.41, 95% CI: -4.80 to -4.03) in patients taking WJD was significantly lower than those taking clomiphene. Our results also indicated that WJD combined with clomiphene was better than clomiphene alone for patients with ODI in terms of pregnancy rate (OR = 1.79, 95% CI: 1.37-2.35).
conclusionsWJD may be effective in the treatment of patients with ODI. Due to the quality and quantity of literature, RCT with large sample size and high quality need to be performed to verify our conclusion.
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.