ArticleIntegrative medicine research2025
Intranasal acupuncture therapy for allergic rhinitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Integrative medicine research, 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.
- Acupuncture-Mediated Neuro-Immune Regulation in Musculoskeletal Pain: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Perspectives.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a prevalent allergic condition affecting the nasal mucosa. Intranasal acupuncture therapy (IAT), an innovative therapy that involves the precise insertion of acupuncture needles into specific nasal acupoints, has demonstrated potential effects in managing AR. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of IAT in the management of AR. Methods: Nine databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from their inception to September 2024. We included participants who were diagnosed with AR and who received IAT alone or as add-on treatment to conventional treatment. The Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool and the GRADE approach were used to assess the quality of the studies. A meta-analysis was performed via RevMan 5.4.1 software. Results: Twenty-one RCTs with 1889 participants were included. The certainty of evidence was generally low or moderate. Compared with sham acupuncture, the IAT significantly reduced the total nasal symptom score (MD -2.65, 95% CI -4.01 to -1.29, 1 RCT, 30 participants, moderate evidence). Compared to an antihistamine, IAT was associated with a lower total nasal non-symptom score (MD -0.44, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.25, 5 RCTs, 295 participants, moderate evidence) and a better quality of life measured by the rhinoconjunctivitis quality of life questionnaire (MD -13.72, 95% CI -18.01 to -9.43, 4 RCTs, 255 participants, moderate evidence). No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusion: The IAT may be beneficial for improving AR-related symptoms and quality of life. However, the safety of the IAT remains unclear due to inadequate reporting. Further high-quality, rigorously designed, and well-reported trials are needed. Protocol registration: PROSPERO, CRD42024526357.
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.