SynthesisJournal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan2023
Effectiveness and safety of Xuebijing injection for patients with coronavirus disease 2019: a systematic review and Metaanalysis.
Synthesis in Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Xuebijing injection in the treatment of COVID-19: An update on clinical studies, potentially active metabolites and mechanisms.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Cytokine Storm in COVID-19: Insight into Pathological Mechanisms and Therapeutic Benefits of Chinese Herbal Medicines.Medicines (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Xuebijing injection (XBJ) on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients.
methodsRelated studies on multiple biological databases and websites were searched up to December 11, 2021 without language and publication time restrictions. Review Manager V.5.3 and Stata 14 software were used for data analysis.
resultsSeven studies were finally included. The Metaanalysis showed that compared with the routine treatment alone, XBJ combined with the routine treatment can reduce the 28day mortality ( = 0.3, 95% : 0.12, 0.74), Creactive protein ( = -12.8, 95% : -23.13, 3.46), erythrocyte sedimentation rate ( = -9.32, 95% : -14.66, -3.98) and interleukin-6 (S = -0.6, 95% : -1.04, -0.17) levels and increase the leukocyte ( = 0.73, 95% : 0.42, 1.04) and lymphocyte count ( = 0.18, 95% : 0.07, 0.29) in peripheral blood; additionally, it has no obvious side effects ( = 1.11, 95% : 0.65, 1.9). There was no evidence that the XBJ combined therapy can improve the nucleic acid conversion rate and computed tomography improvement rate of COVID19 patients.
conclusionsPreliminary evidence suggests that XBJ combined with routine treatment seems to be more effective than routine treatment for patients with COVID19. Limited by the number and quality of included papers, this finding still needs further validation by more studies.
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.