Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39870499›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2025

Chinese herbal formula Tongxie Yaofang granules for diarrhoea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II trial.

Shi-Bing Liang, Hong-Jie Cheng, Qiao-Yan Zhang, Mei Han, Yu-Fei Li, Hui-Juan Cao, Ze-Yu Yu, Ling-Yao Kong, Yan-Mei Cai, Li-Bao An and 15 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialClinical Trial, Phase IIEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors.

Shi-Bing LiangCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3780-5107
Hong-Jie ChengFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2574-4749
Qiao-Yan ZhangFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Mei HanCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Yu-Fei LiCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Hui-Juan CaoCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Ze-Yu YuCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Ling-Yao KongCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5006-0915
Yan-Mei CaiFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Li-Bao AnFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Bao-Tuan ZhaoFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Shan-Shan XuFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Ling YanFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Nai-Wei ZhangFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Bo-Yi JiaFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1054-6248
Wei-Fang LiuFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Fang NiuFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Ba-Teer WuFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Jin-Ming SongFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Shu-Xin JiaFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Meng-Meng ShiFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Xiao-Na ZhangFangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Vincent Chi Ho ChungThe School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Nicola RobinsonCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Jian-Ping LiuCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China Liujp@bucm.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess the therapeutic effects and safety of Tongxie Yaofang (TXYF) granules vs placebo as an alternative treatment for diarrhoea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D). We hypothesised that TXYF would improve clinical responses among patients with IBS-D.

designA randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II, superiority trial.

settingOutpatients attending the Fangshan Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.

participants96 eligible participants included men and women ranging from late adolescence to middle adulthood (18-65 years), diagnosed with IBS-D according to the Rome IV criteria. In addition, they were required to have an irritable bowel syndrome symptom severity score (IBS-SSS) of at least 75.

interventionsTXYF granules (3.7 g) twice daily (taken orally before meals) or placebo for 8 weeks. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was the response rate measured by the change in IBS-SSS compared with baseline at week 8. Secondary outcomes included stool frequency; stool consistency at weeks 4, 8 and 20; and quality of life, anxiety and depression at week 8; and safety was monitored throughout the trial.

resultsThe TXYF and placebo groups each comprised 48 participants. The response rate was not significantly different at week 8 between the two groups (the unadjusted treatment effect estimate (intention-to-treat analysis) was 1.12 (95% CI (0.89, 1.41)), p=0.348). Both groups had a high and similar rate of symptom reduction (79.2% (38/48)

conclusionsDespite showing clinically meaningful improvements in IBS-D symptoms and a reasonable safety profile after 8 weeks, no significant differences were observed between the TXYF and placebo groups. This suggests that the severity of IBS-D symptoms in both treatment arms might have decreased over time, regardless of the treatment, and highlights the need to investigate the relationship between IBS-D and patient psychology. Future large-scale, rigorously designed trials with longer treatment and follow-up periods are essential to evaluate the therapeutic effects and safety of TXYF, and to explore the psychological factors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN12453166.

Indexed as

DiarrheaDrugs, Chinese HerbalIrritable Bowel SyndromeAdolescentAdultAgedDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality of LifeSeverity of Illness IndexTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultDrugs, Chinese HerbalClinical TrialGastroenterologyHerbal medicineIrritable Bowel SyndromeRandomized Controlled Trial

Identifiers

PMID39870499
PMCPMC11772933

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.