SynthesisJournal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan2025
Update evidence of effectiveness on pain relieving of cupping therapy: a systematic review and Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Traditional Chinese Medicine for the prevention and treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: scientific understanding and a multimodal therapeutic approach.Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan · 2026Review
- Fu's Subcutaneous Needling for Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of pain research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo update the current best evidence on the effectiveness and safety of cupping therapy in pain management.
methodsThe protocol of this systematic review was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42021261308). An updated literature searching in 7 databases was conducted from January 2014 to January 2023. Two authors extracted data and assessed the risk of bias independently. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1 software (Cochrane Collaboration, London, UK). Meta-analysis with a random effect model was conducted when there was no serious statistical heterogeneity among trials (
resultsSeventy-two trials with 5720 participants were included. All included trials were assessed as having high risk of bias. The majority of the included trials reported the benefit of cupping plus other therapy or cupping alone on improving cure rate (average risk ratio more than 1.15) and reducing visual analogue scale [average mean difference (
conclusionCupping therapy alone or combined with other therapy was considered benefit in relieving pain, improving the quality of life, and increasing the cure rate of patients with pain conditions, though supported by the low quality of evidence. According to the limited evidence, cupping therapy seems to have less harm than drugs when treating pain conditions.
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.