ArticlePloS one2024
Efficacy and safety of auricular therapy in the treatment of post-stroke constipation: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nonpharmacologic treatment for elderly with constipation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Auricular Acupuncture for Facial Aesthetics: A Preliminary Retrospective Clinical Study of 217 Cases.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2026Article
- Observational
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
backgroundConstipation is one of the common gastrointestinal complications after stroke. It not only aggravates the condition of stroke, but also brings huge medical burden to patients, and has a negative impact on the quality of life of patients. Auricular therapy, as a part of Chinese traditional acupuncture and moxibustion, has been found to be effective in the clinical treatment of constipation. However, no systematic review has investigated the efficacy and safety of auricular therapy in the treatment of post-stroke constipation. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness and safety of auricular therapy for post-stroke constipation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Eight electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library/Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Internet, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Wanfang, and VIP databases, will be searched for relevant studies published from inception to February 2023. Two reviewers will independently conduct research selection, data extraction, and evaluation of research quality. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assess the efficacy and safety of auricular therapy for the treatment of post-stroke constipation will be included in this study. We will use the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool to evaluate the methodological qualities (including bias risk). If possible, a meta-analysis will be performed after screening.
resultsThis study may provide high-quality evidence for the efficacy and safety of auricular therapy in treating post-stroke constipation.
conclusionThe conclusions of our study will provide an evidence to judge whether auricular therapy is an effective and safe intervention for patients with post-stroke constipation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required, as this study was based on a review of published research. This review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated electronically and in print.
trial registrationRegistration number: PROSPERO CRD42023402242.
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.