ArticleIntegrative medicine research2024
Efficacy and safety of herbal medicine Gongjin-Dan and Ssanghwa-Tang in patients with chronic fatigue: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial.
Article in Integrative medicine research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quantitative analysis of Chinese herbal medicine for post-stroke fatigue: a meta-analysis and medication pattern study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gongjin-dan (GJD, also known as Gongchen-dan) and Ssanghwa-tang (SHT, also known as Shuanghe-tang or Souwa-to) are herbal medicines that are widely used in Korea for treating fatigue. However, few studies have evaluated the efficacy and safety of GJD and SHT in the treatment of chronic fatigue. Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, 90 individuals with persistent (≥6 months) chronic fatigue of unknown cause and a Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) score of ≥4 were randomly assigned to GJD group, SHT group, and control group in a 1:1:1 ratio. Outcomes were the changes in the self-reported fatigue questionnaire scores, levels of fatigue-related biomarkers and safety assessment. Results: Out of 103 patients recruited, 90 were included in the analysis. A significant improvement in the Social Functioning (SF) score of Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) at week 4 was observed in the GJD group; similarly, a significant improvement compared with that in the Control group was observed in the Role Emotional (RE) score of SF-36 at weeks 4 and 6 and the Physical Functioning (PF) score of SF-36 at week 6 in the SHT group. Laboratory tests revealed no abnormalities, and serious intervention-related adverse events were not reported. Conclusions: It is suggested that SHT can effectively treat chronic mental and physical fatigue, whereas GJD can effectively treat chronic mental and social fatigue. Furthermore, this study presents evidence supporting the safety of the long-term use of GJD and SHT (up to 4 weeks). Trial registration: This study was registered at Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS) of Korea with the registration number KCT0007515.
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.