Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41316337›Full record

ReviewAnnals of general psychiatry2025

Efficacy of acupuncture for generalized anxiety disorder: a systematic review.

Jingling Lai, Yikun Wang, Xiaoyan Yao, Jinna Yu, Siyan Lu, Jianxin Lu, Jun Liu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of general psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jingling LaiGuang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Yikun WangGuangwai Hospital of Xicheng District, Beijing, China.
Xiaoyan YaoGuang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Jinna YuGuang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Siyan LuBeijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Jianxin LuGuang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China. lujianxin2668@163.com.
Jun LiuGuang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China. tracyliu518@hotmail.com.

Funding

High Level Chinese Medical Hospital Promotion Project HLCMHPP2023125
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of acupuncture for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), with a particular focus on acupuncture alone and acupuncture combined with medication, compared with medication or sham acupuncture.

methodsWe searched MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), and ClinicalTrials.gov up to August 31, 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture for GAD were independently screened and extracted by two reviewers following strict quality assessment. Risk of bias was evaluated using the RoB 2.0 tool, evidence certainty was assessed with the GRADE approach, and meta-analyses were conducted with RevMan 5.3. Subgroup analyses were performed according to comparator type and acupuncture parameters (treatment modality, duration, frequency, and sessions).

resultsA total of 41 RCTs involving 3,209 participants were included. Meta-analysis showed that acupuncture alone (MD -1.79, 95% CI -2.69 to -0.88; 19 studies) and acupuncture combined with medication (MD -2.26, 95% CI -3.05 to -1.48; 20 studies) were superior to medication alone in reducing Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores. Acupuncture also outperformed sham acupuncture (MD -3.46, 95% CI -4.76 to -2.16; 3 studies). Significant improvements were also observed in total effective rate, Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) scores, and Clinical Global Impression-Efficacy Index (CGI-EI), with lower rates of adverse events in the acupuncture groups. Subgroup analyses suggested that a treatment duration of 4-6 weeks was associated with better outcomes; for stand-alone acupuncture, a frequency of seven sessions per week was more effective than medication, while for combined therapy, a frequency of 2-4 sessions per week was more effective than medication. DISCUSSIONS: This meta-analysis indicates that acupuncture, either as a monotherapy or in combination with medication, may provide superior efficacy to medication and sham acupuncture, with fewer adverse events. However, most included studies were rated as having "some concerns" in risk of bias by RoB 2.0, and GRADE assessment suggested low or very low certainty of evidence for the primary outcome (HAMA). Egger's test indicated no significant publication bias in HAMA. Further high-quality, large-scale RCTs are required to confirm these findings. REGISTRATION: The protocol of the review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015016033).

Indexed as

AcupunctureGeneralized anxiety disorderMeta-analysisSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID41316337
PMCPMC12664193

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.