Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42245938›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026

Efficacy and safety of acupuncture-related therapies in the treatment of allergic rhinitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jun Ma, Meng Peng, Yan-Ge Song, Xue-Jiao Xu

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Jun MaHeilongjiang University of Chinese Medicine, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Meng PengHeilongjiang University of Chinese Medicine, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Yan-Ge SongHeilongjiang University of Chinese Medicine, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.
Xue-Jiao XuHeilongjiang University of Chinese Medicine, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Acupuncture therapy, as a complementary and alternative approach for allergic rhinitis (AR), has received increasing attention. However, robust conclusions regarding its effectiveness and safety, either as a standalone treatment or in combination with conventional medication, are still lacking. To systematically assess the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture-related therapies in treating AR, a meta-analysis will be performed. This study is designed to directly compare the three primary interventions: acupuncture therapy plus medication, acupuncture therapy alone, and conventional medication therapy, thereby generating evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice. Methods: We searched relevant reports published in multiple scientific databases and related registration platforms from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2025, including medical databases such as PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP. The search process was conducted in both Chinese and English. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared acupuncture therapy with conventional medication, or acupuncture therapy plus conventional medication with conventional medication for patients with AR were included. Two researchers independently extracted data from the included studies using a standardized form and cross-verified their results upon completion to ensure accuracy. For continuous outcomes, effect sizes were calculated as either the standardized mean difference (SMD) or mean difference (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For dichotomous outcomes, risk ratios with 95% CI were used. All statistical meta-analyses, subgroup analyses, and assessment of publication bias were performed using RevMan 5.4 software. Results: This meta-analysis included 38 RCTs involving 3,349 participants. The results showed that, compared with conventional medication alone, both acupuncture therapy alone (SMD = -0.65, 95% CI [-1.17, -0.14]) and acupuncture therapy combined with conventional medication (SMD = -1.18, 95% CI [-1.84, -0.51]) reduced the Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) at the end of treatment. Additionally, improvements were observed in Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) score (acupuncture therapy: SMD = -1.16, 95% CI [-1.42, -0.90]; combined therapy: SMD = -1.40, 95% CI [-1.95, -0.86]). The reported adverse effects associated with acupuncture therapy were mild and transient. These findings suggest that acupuncture-related therapies demonstrate significant improvements in key outcome measures and may represent an effective and safe approach for treating AR, although the quality of evidence remains low. Conclusion: Acupuncture-related therapies have shown promising effectiveness in treating AR, effectively alleviating symptoms, improving quality of life, and causing only mild adverse reactions. However, the quality of evidence for certain outcome indicators in the included studies remains low. It is recommended that further validation be conducted through large-scale, multi-center, high-quality RCTs to provide higher-level evidence-based medical support. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251160569, identifier CRD420251160569.

Indexed as

acupunctureacupuncture therapyallergic rhinitismeta-analysissystematic review

Identifiers

PMID42245938
PMCPMC13231950

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.