ArticleIntegrative medicine research2026
Effect of electroacupuncture versus prucalopride for ultra-severe chronic constipation: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Integrative medicine research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02047045 (Effect Comparison of Electro-acupuncture and Prucalopride for Severe Chronic Constipation), which is not on this 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.
Effect Comparison of Electro-acupuncture and Prucalopride for Severe Chronic Constipation: a Multi-center Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trial
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To explore the effect and safety of electroacupuncture (EA) compared to prucalopride in patients with ultra-severe chronic constipation (USCC), a condition defined by the absence of weekly complete spontaneous bowel movements (CSBMs). Methods: This study was a secondary analysis using data from a multicenter, non-inferiority randomized controlled trial, involving patients with USCC. Participants received either EA or prucalopride treatment. The primary outcome was the mean weekly CSBMs from weeks 1 to 8. Secondary outcomes included the mean weekly CSBMs, the proportion of overall and weekly responders, changes in straining and stool consistency scores, Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) scores, and the proportion of patients using rescue medication. Results: A total of 317 participants with USCC were included (151 in the EA group and 166 in the prucalopride group). From weeks 1 to 8, both groups showed similar increases in the CSBMs (difference: -0.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.34 to 0.30, Conclusions: In participants with USCC, EA showed improvements in CSBMs, defecation-related symptoms, and quality of life that were comparable to those observed with prucalopride. The effects of EA might persist for 24 weeks, and EA exhibited a superior safety profile. Trial registration number: NCT02047045 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
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.