SynthesisJournal of health, population, and nutrition2026
Caffeic acid for the management of leukopenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of health, population, and nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have revealed the benefits of caffeic acid tablets on leukopenia and thrombocytopenia, but the results are inconclusive. This meta-analysis of RCTs aimed to assess the effects of caffeic acid tablet supplementation on treating leukopenia.
methodsA systematic review of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane library, China Knowledge Network, China Biomedical Literature Database, Wipu.com and Wanfang Data were conducted, and the search time frame was from the establishment of the database up to May 2025. Data were pooled using a random-effects model to calculate standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
resultsThirty-three studies with 2,483 patients were included. Meta-analysis results indicated that the clinical effectiveness of caffeic acid tablets for leukopenia was significantly different from that of the control group (RR: 1.44; 95% CI: 1.31, 1.58, p < 0.01; I
conclusionCaffeic acid may be a promising management for the treatment of leukopenia. The findings should be interpreted with caution due to the high risk of bias in many included trials and the limited generalizability, as all studies were conducted in China.
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.