SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024
Efficacy and safety of acupuncture for pain relief: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electroacupuncture at Neiguan (PC6) and Shuigou (GV26) regulates microglial polarization and neuroinflammation through the cGAS-STING signaling pathway in ischemic stroke.IBRO neuroscience reports · 2026Article
- Mechanisms of Different Brainstem Nuclei Involved in Electroacupuncture-Induced Analgesia.Chinese journal of integrative medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Differential placebo effect of sham acupuncture for chronic pain: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2025Article
- Opioid Stewardship and Gastrointestinal (GI)-Sparing Alternatives in Primary Care Pain Management.Cureus · 2025Review
- Fu's Subcutaneous Needling for Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of pain research · 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
objectiveThis study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of traditional acupuncture for pain relief based on rigorously designed RCTs with double-blind. The findings seek to provide valuable insights for clinical practice and inform future research.
methodsA literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for randomized controlled trials on traditional acupuncture for pain management using a double-blind design, published from database inception to November 22, 2023. The Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool was used to assess potential biases in the included studies, followed by a comprehensive analysis to evaluate efficacy and safety.
resultsThe findings show a significant positive effect on pain improvement, evidenced by changes in visual analog scale scores (mean difference 0.97 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-1.27]). Safety analysis showed no significant differences in adverse reactions between the acupuncture and control groups (relative risk 1.40 [95% CI 0.52-3.74]), with no serious adverse effects reported.
conclusionTraditional acupuncture is effective and safe in pain management. This suggests that acupuncture can be a valuable approach in clinical practice. Future studies should explore optimal treatment durations and frequency, using larger sample sizes for more comprehensive insights.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39520569What 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.