SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of moxibustion therapy for primary dysmenorrhea.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Ginger Moxibustion Activates TRPV1 to Modulate the Locus Coeruleus-Spinal Cord-Uterus Pathway and Alleviates Primary Dysmenorrhea in Rats.Journal of pain research · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Primary dysmenorrhea is a common gynecological disease. Compared with traditional Chinese medicine treatment, moxibustion has advantages as a main treatment method. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of simple moxibustion therapy for primary dysmenorrhea. Methods: Randomized controlled trials were searched from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, The Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan-fang database and VIP database. In the literature included in these databases, clinical reporters evaluated the efficacy of moxibustion as the treatment for primary dysmenorrhea. All included literature was assessed for risk bias by using Risk of Bias assessment tool 2.0, and meta-analysis was conducted using Rev. Man 5.4. Results: The findings demonstrated that the moxibustion group exhibited a statistically significant response in comparison to the control group. The improvement observed in the Cox Menstrual Symptom Scale and the visual analogue scale score between the two groups exhibited heterogeneity, with a statistically significant difference noted. In terms of Traditional Chinese Medicine symptom scores, the experimental group demonstrated superiority over the control group. Furthermore, the progesterone levels in the moxibustion treatment were found to be higher than in the control group, while the estrogen levels in the experimental group were lower than in the control group, with a statistically significant difference observed ( Conclusion: Moxibustion therapy shows significantly better efficacy in treating primary dysmenorrhea. However, a large sample, multi-center, high-quality RCT is still needed to evaluate its safety and efficacy. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, Identifier CRD42024580466.
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.