ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Promoting the development and approval of new traditional Chinese medicines in China: a pooled analysis of data from 2013 to 2024.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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.
- Development Timelines of Innovative Drugs in China: A 15-Year Cross-Sectional Analysis of Characteristics and Influencing Factors.Clinical and translational 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The reform of the development and approval system for traditional Chinese medicines (TCMs) has been in progress for several years. This reform has restructured the registration classifications and established a distinctive evaluation and registration evidence system for TCMs. This study compiled comprehensive data on all new TCMs approved in China from January 2013 to November 2024, analyzing drug characteristics and the changes in development and review timelines before and after the reform. The focus was particularly on the evaluation and registration evidence requirements, clinical development pathways, and the application of pivotal clinical and real-world evidence in supporting TCM approvals. Between 2013 and 2024, 77 new TCMs were approved for marketing. Post-reform, there has been a gradual increase in the number of new TCMs, with a notably significant rise in ancient classic formulas. Following 2020, the establishment of the "three-in-one" evaluation and registration evidence system was implemented to accommodate the distinct characteristics of TCMs. This system revealed significant discrepancies in the registration classifications for new TCMs, particularly concerning TCM theory, human use experience, and clinical trials. These discrepancies have led to varied clinical development pathways. Importantly, the findings suggest that the marketing approval of new TCMs is no longer solely reliant on Randomized Controlled Trials. Instead, TCM theories and empirical human use experience constitute critical evidence for TCM approval. Additionally, evidence derived from real-world studies has become instrumental in supporting the marketing of TCMs. Although the review time for TCMs has significantly decreased after the reform, the overall development time has increased. Simultaneously, this article proposed specific recommendations to address the array of challenges encountered by new TCMs in the realms of development and approval.
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.