SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Efficacy and safety of Xiaoyao San in the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. 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.
- Efficacy and safety of modifiedFrontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS): diagnosis and management.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Review
- Commentary: Efficacy and safety of Xiaoyao San in the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Xiaoyao San (XYS) has been increasingly used in China for treating chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), but its efficacy and safety remain unclear. Objective: To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of XYS compared to standard biomedical treatments (SBT) in CFS patients. Methods: A comprehensive search of English and Chinese databases was conducted up to December 2024. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials comparing XYS or XYS + SBT to SBT alone. Primary outcomes were effective rate (ER) and fatigue scale-14 (FS-14). Secondary outcomes included self-rating anxiety scale (SAS), self-rating depression scale (SDS), and adverse events (AEs). Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4, and evidence quality was assessed using the GRADE approach. Results: Six studies involving 623 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that XYS-based interventions significantly improved ER (RR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.18-1.37, I Conclusion: XYS, whether alone or with SBT, is effective and safe for improving ER, fatigue, anxiety, and depression in CFS patients. However, due to the low quality of the evidence, results should be interpreted cautiously. High-quality RCTs with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are needed to provide stronger evidence for the clinical use of XYS in managing CFS. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=493084, identifier CRD42023493084.
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.