ArticleBMJ open2024
Efficacy and mechanism of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation for angina severity in patients with chronic coronary syndromes: study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 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.
- Impact of laser acupuncture on gastrointestinal function recovery in patients after acute appendicitis surgery: A retrospective clinical study.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionStimulating acupoints is beneficial for improving heart health but the clinical efficacy of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) as a complementary therapy for chronic coronary syndromes (CCSs) remains unclear. This study aims to evaluate whether TEAS can alleviate angina severity in patients with CCS and to explore the potential mechanisms underlying TEAS. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study, conducted across two clinical centres, involved 90 participants distributed equally into three groups via simple randomisation (1:1:1 ratio). The research cycle was 28 weeks including a 4-week baseline, 12-week treatment and 12-week follow-up period. All groups will receive basic treatment with the TEAS group additionally receiving 36 sessions of TEAS stimulation over the 12 weeks. The two control groups will either undergo sham TEAS or no additional intervention alongside their basic treatment. The primary outcome is the 6-minute walk test; eight other indicators will serve as secondary outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval for this study was granted by the Medical Research Ethics Committee of the Third Clinical Affiliated Hospital of Changchun University of Chinese Medicine in May 2023. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2400079383.
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.