ReviewAmerican journal of translational research2024
Meta-analysis of clinical efficacy of acupuncture and moxibustion in rehabilitation treatment for post-stroke aphasia.
Review in American journal of translational research, 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.
- Acupuncture combined with language training for aphasia in children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Stratified Efficacy and Peripheral Neuroinflammatory Mechanisms of Jin's Tongue Triple Acupuncture as Adjunctive Therapy for Subacute Post-Stroke Broca Aphasia: A 1:1 PSM Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of molecular neuroscience : MN · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of acupuncture for post-stroke aphasia: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy of traditional Chinese acupuncture and moxibustion in treating post-stroke aphasia through meta-analysis.
methodsMajor Chinese and international databases were searched from their inception to December 2023. The search terms included "randomized controlled clinical studies on acupuncture treatment for stroke-related aphasia". After screening by specialists, the selected studies were analyzed using RevMan 5.3 software.
resultsA total of 1,900 documents were retrieved, of which 10 studies involving 848 cases met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The results indicated that traditional Chinese acupuncture could enhance the effectiveness of language rehabilitation training both as a standalone treatment and in combination with other assessment measures. Acupuncture improved the clinical effectiveness of language rehabilitation training for patients with post-stroke aphasia (RR = 3.75, 95% CI [2.54, 2.55], P < 0.00001). When combined with language rehabilitation therapy, acupuncture significantly improved patients' comprehension (MD = 0.95, 95% CI [0.89, 1.02], P < 0.00001), repetition (MD = 0.82, 95% CI [0.76, 0.88], P < 0.00001), reading (MD = 1.95, 95% CI [1.89, 2.01], P < 0.00001), and spontaneous speech abilities (MD = 10.90, 95% CI [9.56, 12.23], P < 0.00001), compared to the control group.
conclusionAcupuncture improves the clinical efficacy of language rehabilitation training for stroke-related aphasia. It also enhanced patients' comprehension, repetition, and spontaneous speech abilities more effectively than monotherapy. However, the overall quality of the included studies was low, emphasizing the need for high-quality randomized controlled trials to further validate these findings.
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.