ArticleChinese medicine2025
Effect of traditional Chinese medicine combined with conventional Western medicine for patients with severe/very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a multi-center, randomized, double-blind, controlled study.
Article in Chinese medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02270424 (A Multi-center, Randomized, Double-blind, Controlled Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness of on Severe / Very Severe COPD Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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.
A Multi-center, Randomized, Double-blind, Controlled Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness of on Severe / Very Severe COPD Patients
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese classic prescriptions combined with metformin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Clinical outcomes associated with Shenling Bufei Tongluo Decoction as add-on therapy in stable COPD patients with a frequent-exacerbator phenotype: a retrospective real-world cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTraditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is widely used in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of comprehensive therapy based on TCM patterns for patients with stable, severe to very severe COPD.
methodsA multicenter, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted. Eligible patients were randomly allocated in equal proportions to two groups: the trial group, which received TCM-based therapy with Bu-Fei Jian-Pi, and Bu-Fei Yi-Shen, and Yi-Qi Zi-Shen granules tailored to TCM syndromes, and the control group, which received a placebo resembling Chinese medicine. Both groups also received conventional Western medicine as part of their treatment. Acute exacerbations (AEs), lung function, dyspnea scores, the 6-min walking test (6MWT), and the COPD assessment test (CAT) were assessed over 12 months of treatment, with an additional 12 months of follow-up.
resultsA total of 467 patients were included in the analysis with 228 in the experimental group and 239 in the control group. The Chinese herbal granules group significantly reduced AEs (0.63 vs. 1.03 events, P = 0.002), improved mMRC scores (-0.17 points, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.03; P = 0.015), 6MWT (29.24 m, 95% CI 10.71-47.77; P = 0.002), and CAT (-3.11 points, 95% CI -4.13 to -2.09, P < 0.001), compared with the control group. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of FVC (l) and FEV
conclusionComprehensive therapy based on TCM patterns demonstrated efficacy in patients with severe to very severe COPD, reducing the frequency of AEs, improving dyspnea and exercise capacity, and alleviating symptoms.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02270424. Registered 17 October 2014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02270424?id=NCT02270424&rank=1 .
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.