SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
Efficacy of Chinese herbal medicine in patients with osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Current evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) supports the anti-osteoporotic properties of Chinese Herbal Medicine (CHM); however, its therapeutic advantages over conventional treatments remain inconclusive. This study aimed to compare the therapeutic effects of CHM with those of conventional therapy in patients with osteoporosis, using a meta-analysis approach. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang databases was conducted through March 2025 to identify eligible RCTs. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as effect estimates, with pooled analyses calculated using a random-effects model. Additional exploratory analyses included sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Results: Eighteen RCTs involving a total of 1,816 patients with osteoporosis were included in the meta-analysis. CHM was associated with increased bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine (WMD: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.13; Conclusion: Chinese Herbal Medicine was associated with significant improvements in BMD at the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and Ward's triangle area compared to conventional therapies, though the evidence is limited by moderate study quality and high heterogeneity. The findings suggest potential benefits of CHM in specific skeletal sites, but further rigorous trials are needed to confirm efficacy. Systematic review registration: INPLASY platform (number: INPLASY202530115).
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.