SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Mulberry twig alkaloids for type 2 diabetes mellitus: 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 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.
- Integrated widely-targeted metabolome and transcriptome analysis provide novel insights into the regulation of nutritional formation inFrontiers in plant science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Diabetes has emerged as a significant global health concern, with over 95% of cases categorized as type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The disease not only imparts detrimental effects on individual health but also imposes a substantial burden on societal economics and healthcare systems. Notably, there is a paucity of meta-analyses on the efficacy of mulberry twig alkaloids (MTAs) for the treatment of T2DM. Methods: The systematic review registration number is CRD42024523218. Data were retrieved from Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, PubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Scopus, Chongqing VIP, CINAHL, SINOMED, ChiCTR, and Wanfang Data from their inception to 1 February 2024 for herbal product-related randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The risk of bias assessment and meta-analysis were performed using ReviewManager 5.4 and STATA 15.0. TSA software version 0.9.5.10 was used to assess whether the results achieved the required information size (RIS). GRADEprofiler 3.6 software was used to estimate the quality of evidence for the outcomes. Results: Nine studies were included for a total of 10 trials with 1,178 patients. The results indicated that MTAs were more effective than placebo in reducing HbA1cglycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and MTAs combined with hypoglycemic drugs were more effective than hypoglycemic drugs alone in reducing HbA1c, fasting blood glucose (FBG), and 2-hour postprandial glucose (2hPG). In terms of lipid control, MTAs combined with hypoglycemic drugs showed better control of triglycerides (TGs) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) efficacy than hypoglycemic drugs alone. After MTA treatment, there was no damage to liver function compared to placebo. The safety of MTAs, whether alone or in combination with hypoglycemic drugs, was comparable to that of hypoglycemic drugs alone. Conclusion: In T2DM patients, MTAs were more effective than placebo. MTAs combined with hypoglycemic drugs showed better results than hypoglycemic drugs alone. The safety of MTAs was equivalent to that of hypoglycemic drugs. However, due to heterogeneity and possible bias, the results should still be interpreted with caution. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=523218.
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.