ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2025
Effects of Combining Traditional East Asian and Conventional Western Medicine on Acute Stroke Outcomes.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 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.
- Perceptions of Integrated Medical Service Among Stroke Patients in South Korea: Self-Reported Web-Based Survey Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraditional East Asian medicine (TM) is widely used in Korea and other East Asian countries. However, the effects of TM treatment on acute ischemic stroke (AIS) outcomes remain unclear, as previous studies lacked a sufficient sample size, a consecutive series design, or a prospective outcome capture approach. We aimed to investigate whether combining TM with conventional Western medicine (CM) treatments (C+TM) leads to better outcomes after AIS, relative to CM treatment alone.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 2157 consecutive patients with AIS from a prospectively collected registry (2011-2021) at our center and compared the CM and C+TM groups in terms of demographics and clinical efficacy, including a 3-month favorable functional outcome (modified Rankin scale score ≤1) by performing modified Poisson regression analysis, with inverse probability of treatment weighting to balance key clinical and demographic variables, as the main analysis.
resultsMean age was 66.7±12.8 years, and 63.5% were men. Compared with patients in the CM group (n=1750), those in the C+TM group (n=407) were more likely to be women, have higher admission National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores, present more frequently with strokes due to large-arteryatherosclerosis or small-vessel occlusion, and have a lower prevalence of smoking history. C+TM treatment was associated with a ~40% significantly lower rate of 3-month favorable functional outcome (adjusted relative risk [RR], 0.60 [95% CI, 0.51-0.70]; RR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.53-0.72] after inverse probability of treatment weighting; both
conclusionsTM, when integrated into CM care, may be linked to less favorable functional outcomes after AIS.
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.