Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36580333›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2022

Acupuncture for the Treatment of Diarrhea-Predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

Ling-Yu Qi, Jing-Wen Yang, Shi-Yan Yan, Jian-Feng Tu, Yan-Fen She, Ying Li, Li-Li Chi, Bang-Qi Wu, Cun-Zhi Liu

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
13.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Ling-Yu QiInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, School of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Jing-Wen YangInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, School of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Shi-Yan YanInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, School of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Jian-Feng TuInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, School of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Yan-Fen SheSchool of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, Hebei University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shijiazhuang, China.
Ying LiSchool of Graduate, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.
Li-Li ChiDepartment of Spleen and Stomach, the Affiliated Hospital of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Bang-Qi WuNational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Clinical Medical Research Center, the First Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
Cun-Zhi LiuInternational Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, School of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Beijing University of Chinese Medicine · CNAffiliated Hospital of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNChengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNFirst Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNHebei University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Acupuncture is a promising therapy for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but the use of subjective scales as an assessment is accompanied by high placebo response rates. Objectives: To preliminarily test the feasibility of using US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-recommended end points to evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture in the treatment of IBS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pilot, multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted in 4 tertiary hospitals in China from July 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021, and 14-week data collection was completed in March 2021. Individuals with a diagnosis of IBS with diarrhea (IBS-D) were randomized to 1 of 3 groups, including 2 acupuncture groups (specific acupoints [SA] and nonspecific acupoints [NSA]) and a sham acupuncture group (non-acupoints [NA]) with a 1:1:1 ratio. Interventions: Patients in all groups received twelve 30-minute sessions over 4 consecutive weeks at 3 sessions per week (ideally every other day). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the response rate at week 4, which was defined as the proportion of patients whose worst abdominal pain score (score range, 0-10, with 0 indicating no pain and 10 indicating unbearable severe pain) decreased by at least 30% and the number of type 6 or 7 stool days decreased by 50% or greater. Results: Ninety patients (54 male [60.0%]; mean [SD] age, 34.5 [11.3] years) were enrolled, with 30 patients in each group. There were substantial improvements in the primary outcomes for all groups (composite response rates of 46.7% [95% CI, 28.8%-65.4%] in the SA group, 46.7% [95% CI, 28.8%-65.4%] in the NSA group, and 26.7% [95% CI, 13.0%-46.2%] in the NA group), although the difference between them was not statistically significant (P = .18). The response rates of adequate relief at week 4 were 64.3% (95% CI, 44.1%-80.7%) in the SA group, 62.1% (95% CI, 42.4%-78.7%) in the NSA group, and 55.2% (95% CI, 36.0%-73.0%) in the NA group (P = .76). Adverse events were reported in 2 patients (6.7%) in the SA group and 3 patients (10%) in NSA or NA group. Conclusions and Relevance: In this pilot randomized clinical trial, acupuncture in both the SA and NSA groups showed clinically meaningful improvement in IBS-D symptoms, although there were no significant differences among the 3 groups. These findings suggest that acupuncture is feasible and safe; a larger, sufficiently powered trial is needed to accurately assess efficacy. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000030670.

Indexed as

Acupuncture TherapyIrritable Bowel SyndromeAbdominal PainAdultDiarrheaHumansMalePilot ProjectsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID36580333
PMCPMC9856830
OpenAlexW4313325426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.