ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Efficacy and safety of reduning injection for severe pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrative Traditional Chinese Medicine Strategies for Refractory Mycoplasma Pneumonia in Children: Clinical Challenges, Mechanisms, and Evidence-Based Insights.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Review
- Efficacy and validation of a clinical model to predict acute kidney injury in severe pneumonia requiring mechanical ventilation in elderly patients: a multicenter retrospective observational analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Reduning (RDN) injection is a traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) extract injection commonly used as an adjunct therapy for severe pneumonia (SP) in clinical practice in China; however, further validation is required. This study aims to systematically assess the efficacy and safety of RDN injection in treating SP. Methods: The study was conducted using the data from CNKI, WanFang, VIP, SinoMed, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from their inception to 6 April 2024. We collected randomized controlled trials on the treatment of SP using RDN injection, and used Review Manager (version 5.3) for meta analysis. The primary outcomes was clinical efficacy. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool 2 (RoB 2) to assess the risk of bias for each study. Results: A total of 1,897 patients with SP from 22 studies were included. The meta-analysis results showed that the combination of RDN injection and conventional treatment or antibiotic treatment for patients with SP was superior to traditional and antibiotic treatments alone in terms of clinical efficacy [risk ratio = 1.25%; 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.20, 1.30); Conclusion: The administration of RDN injection as an adjunct therapy for SP can enhance clinical efficacy, reduce fever duration, accelerate cough resolution, shorten the time for lung rales to resolve, accelerate chest X-ray improvement, and decrease hospitalization duration. Further well-designed and standardized large sample clinical studies are needed for validation. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42024540365.
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.