ArticleHeliyon2024
Pediatric massage therapy in infants and children under 5 years: An umbrella review of systematic reviews.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization as a promising approach for children with chronic neck pain: A single-blind, randomized study.Journal of back and musculoskeletal rehabilitation · 2026Trial
- The state of infant massage use in neonatal intensive care units.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- Understanding factors related to application of traditional Chinese medicine tuina for congenital muscular torticollis in children: a qualitative study based on traditional Chinese medicine tuina practitioners.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2026Article
- Parental Experiences of Administering PediatricJMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2025Article
- Implementation and Strategy in Developmental Care Practice in Infants with Congenital Heart Disease in Intensive Care Unit: Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically evaluate and synthesize quantitative evidence regarding the effects of pediatric massage in infants and children under five years. Review methods: We conducted searches in databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Health Technology Assessment Database, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Allied and Complementary Medicine, Embase, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, SinoMed, and CQVIP up to February 2024. Two reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data, and conducted quality appraisals on the included studies. We focused on systematic reviews with meta-analyses comparing pediatric Results: Twenty-two systematic reviews with meta-analysis of 81 outcomes were included. Seven studies (31.8 %) were high quality, and the evidence of 6 (7.4 %) outcomes were evaluated as high quality. The meta-analysis results demonstrate significant benefits of pediatric massage for infants compared to routine care, with increased weight gain (MD 455.07 g; 95 % CI 86.33 to 823.8; I Conclusions: Pediatric massage significantly enhances mother-child attachment, promotes physical growth, reduces fussing, lowers bilirubin levels, improves motor and psychomotor development, as well as manages digestive conditions and pain in children under 5 years. Future research should improve study quality and comprehensively report adverse events.
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.