SynthesisFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Efficacy comparison of different external traditional Chinese medicine therapies as monotherapy or in combination for premenstrual syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) is a common gynecological problem that can seriously impair the quality of life of women of childbearing age. Substantial evidence confirms the efficacy of external Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) therapies for PMS, though the optimal intervention remains uncertain. Objective: This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of external TCM therapies for PMS using Bayesian network meta-analysis, thereby informing evidence-based clinical decisions. Methods: We systematically searched eight databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating various external TCM therapies for PMS, with all searches conducted through March 10, 2025. The primary outcome measures were overall effective rate and symptom severity scores. We used Stata 17.0 to perform network meta-analysis and compare the therapeutic effects of different interventions on improving PMS symptoms. Results: The screening process identified 21 eligible RCTs involving 1,818 patients. Most studies demonstrated unclear risk of bias due to insufficient selective reporting details, while six studies were rated high risk for inadequate randomization reporting. The NMA results show that in terms of total effective rate, Jianpi-Shugan acupuncture has the highest SUCRA value (95.7), and for symptom and sign scores, ear acupressure ranks first (SUCRA = 71.2). Conclusion: External treatment methods of traditional Chinese medicine can serve as a complementary or alternative therapy for PMS; Jianpi-Shugan acupuncture can better enhance the overall effective rate in treating PMS, while ear acupressure is more effective in improving symptom and sign scores. Overall, external treatment methods of TCM for PMS are effective and have almost no side effects, but many high-quality studies are still needed to provide more direct evidence. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42025643025.
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.