SynthesisAnnals of medicine2025
Efficacy and safety of compound glycyrrhizin in patients with alopecia areata: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Annals of medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biochemical outcomes and safety profiles of compound glycyrrhizin versus magnesium isoglycyrrhizinate in Kawasaki disease: a retrospective propensity score‑matched cohort study.Translational pediatrics · 2026Article
- Microneedle technology integrated with diverse therapeutic modalities for hair regrowth in alopecia.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2026Review
- Therapeutic potential of glycyrrhizic acid in inflammation-related diseases: from HMGB1-oriented molecular insights to preclinical application.Archives of pharmacal research · 2026Review
- Mechanisms and therapeutic potential of glycyrrhizic acid: Insights into key signaling pathways and disease modulation (Review).Molecular medicine reports · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough compound glycyrrhizin (CG) has been widely used to alopecia areata (AA) in China, its efficacy and safety remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CG for AA. MATERIALS AND
methodsEight literature databases were retrieved from their inceptions to 29 February 2024 to identify the eligible randomized controlled trials comparing CG plus conventional treatments with conventional treatments alone for the treatment of AA. Risk ratio (RR), mean difference and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to estimate the pooled results. RevMan 5.4 (Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark) and Stata 12.0 software (StataCorp., College Station, TX) were used for statistical analysis.
resultsA total of 23 eligible studies with 2219 patients were included. The pooled results revealed that CG plus conventional treatments was superior to conventional treatments alone in cure rate (RR = 1.60, 95%CI [1.47, 1.74],
conclusionsThe combination of CG and conventional treatments was effective and safe for patients with AA, and CG could promote hair regrowth with mild AEs.
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.