SynthesisFrontiers in neuroscience2025
The efficacy of acupuncture for post-stroke dysphagia: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sustained efficacy of acupuncture in post-stroke dysphagia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Oral Health Care for Post-Stroke Dysphagia Patients: A Systematic Review of Best Evidence.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acupuncture has been widely used in clinical rehabilitation as an adjunctive therapy for post-stroke dysphagia (PSD). Although numerous meta-analyses (MAs) have evaluated its efficacy, a comprehensive assessment of the methodological quality and evidence strength of these MAs is still lacking. Methods: Two researchers independently searched eight databases for relevant literature, screened studies according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, and extracted data from the eligible systematic reviews (SRs) and MAs. The methodological quality, reporting completeness, risk of bias, and strength of evidence were rigorously evaluated using the AMSTAR 2, PRISMA-A, ROBIS, and GRADE, respectively. In addition, the GROOVE tool was used to assess the degree of overlap among original studies by calculating corrected covered area (CCA). Results: This overview included 19 MAs. Based on AMSTAR 2, four studies were rated as low quality, while 14 were rated as critically low quality. In terms of reporting quality, major deficiencies were observed, including a lack of protocol registration, incomplete search strategies, inadequate risk of bias assessments, and missing funding disclosures. For risk of bias, only six studies were judged to be at low risk. Furthermore, it revealed a slight overlap among the original studies with a CCA of 2.86%. Among the 68 outcome indicators, only 11.76% were graded as moderate quality, while 50% were classified as low quality and 38.24% as critically low quality, according to the GRADE assessment. Among the moderate-quality outcomes, electroacupuncture combined with swallowing rehabilitation therapy (SRT) demonstrated superior effectiveness compared to SRT alone (OR = 5.40, 95% CI: 3.78-7.72), as did acupuncture plus SRT (RR = 1.26, 95% CI: 1.19-1.34). Significant improvements in swallowing function were also reported, as measured by scales such as the Water Swallowing Test (WMD = -0.69, 95% CI: -0.78 to -0.60) and the Penetration Aspiration Scale (MD = -1.02, 95% CI: -1.27 to -0.78). Conclusion: While acupuncture appears to be a promising adjunctive treatment for PSD, the overall quality of evidence remains low. More rigorously designed and transparently reported studies are needed to strengthen the evidence base and support clinical decision-making.
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.