Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42079858›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of endocrinology2026

The Efficacy of Yanghe Decoction on Diabetic Foot: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Xia Wang, Yunjiao Yang, Junhua Pan, Qiu Chen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of endocrinology, 2026. 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. Review
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

4 authors.

Xia WangDepartment of Endocrinology, Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, Sichuan, China, scu.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3933-8346
Yunjiao YangDepartment of Endocrinology, Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, Sichuan, China, scu.edu.cn.
Junhua PanDazhou Hospital of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine, Dazhou, Sichuan, China, scu.edu.cn.
Qiu ChenDepartment of Endocrinology, Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, Sichuan, China, scu.edu.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1089-4194

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the potential clinical effect of Yanghe decoction on diabetic foot. Methods: We comprehensively searched Web of Science, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases from their inception to December 6, 2025, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating Yanghe decoction for DF. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 and Stata 15.0 software. Results: A total of 15 studies with 1224 patients were included, 614 in the treatment group and 610 in the control group. The results suggest that the total effective rate of the treatment group may be higher than that of the control group (RR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.17 to 1.29, Conclusions: Low certainty evidence suggests that Yanghe decoction may potentially improve the clinical symptoms of diabetic foot, may shorten the wound healing time, and may reduce the wound area. However, the independent clinical efficacy of Yanghe decoction for diabetic foot cannot be determined due to the high heterogeneity of cointerventions in the included studies. This study is further limited by the insufficient quantity and quality of the included studies, and the above tentative implications need to be verified by more large-sample and multicenter RCT studies that standardize interventions and control for cointervention variables.

Indexed as

ankle-brachial indexdiabetic footdiabetic foot ulcermeta-analysisYanghe decoction

Identifiers

PMID42079858
PMCPMC13130148

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.