ReviewAnnals of medicine2024
Methodology for the selection and evaluation of outcomes for Chinese herbal injection in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD): a comprehensive study.
Review in Annals of medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Psychometric development and validation of the paternal breastfeeding support scale in Chinese mothers: a methodological cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop a comprehensive framework for selecting outcomes in evaluating the clinical efficacy of Chinese herbal injections and to scientifically select outcomes for the clinical randomized controlled trial (RCT) of Tan-Re-Qing injection intervening AECOPD.
methodsA comprehensive literature review and consensus methods, including focus groups and Delphi surveys, were utilized.
resultsLiterature analysis identified 513 publications, encompassing regulatory guidance, guidelines, expert consensus, and RCTs. Initial dimensions include clinical efficacy, safety, and health economics. Primary outcomes should align with study objectives. Recommended evaluation domains include death, treatment outcome, future impact, quality of life, and safety. Commonly recommended outcomes comprise mortality, arterial blood gases, CAT, exacerbation frequency, adverse events, and lung function. Network meta-analysis identified specific therapeutic efficacy markers (white blood cell count, IL-6, IL-8). Quality of life assessment recommended SF-12, EQ-5D, or CAT. Emphasis on AECOPD frequency and lung function was noted. Delphi survey yielded 41 outcomes across various domains for evaluating Tan-Re-Qing in AECOPD.
conclusionThe findings contribute to developing a robust and reliable trial design for Tan-Re-Qing injection in AECOPD. The methodology employed in this study ensures a systematic and comprehensive approach to the selection of outcomes for the clinical evaluation of future studies in this field.
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.