SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2022
Comparative efficacy of acupuncture-related techniques for mild cognitive impairment: A Bayesian network analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of acupuncture combined with medication for mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.Systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Single non-pharmacological intervention of depression in the elderly with cognitive dysfunction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Exploring acupuncture as a therapeutic approach for tic disorders: a review of current understanding and potential benefits.Frontiers in neurology · 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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A comparison and ranking of the clinical effects of various acupuncture and acupuncture-related therapies on patients with mild cognitive impairment. Methods: Using network meta-analysis, we assessed the direct and indirect evidence from relevant research. Seven databases [PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP Database, and Wanfang database] were examined to find randomized controlled trials of acupuncture-related therapies for individuals with mild cognitive impairment. Two researchers independently reviewed the literature, retrieved the data, and evaluated the risk of bias in the included studies. The data were analyzed using Stata15.0 and R3.6.1 software. Results: A total of 27 randomized controlled trials involving 2,210 patients were included. Bayesian NMA showed that manual acupuncture combined with conventional therapy, moxibustion combined with conventional therapy, manual acupuncture, and electroacupuncture were most effective in improving the MMSE score. The most effective interventions related to the MoCA score were moxibustion combined with conventional therapy, followed by manual acupuncture combined with conventional therapy, acupressure combined with conventional therapy, and manual acupuncture combined with moxibustion. Manual acupuncture combined with moxibustion was dominant in the cluster ranking. The results of the node splitting method revealed that direct and indirect evidence were consistent ( Conclusion: This research will add to the body of knowledge about the safety and efficacy of acupuncture-related therapies in the treatment of mild cognitive impairment. The results of this study will also assist in the choice of clinical guidelines that optimize acupuncture treatment for patients with mild cognitive impairment.
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.