ReviewJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2026
A Synthesis of the Best Evidence for Rhubarb Administration in the Treatment of Acute Pancreatitis in China.
Review in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Acute pancreatitis has complex causes, and traditional Chinese medicine plays a significant role in its treatment. However, there is a lack of standardized protocols and a comprehensive best evidence summary for rhubarb administration in acute pancreatitis, leading to inconsistent clinical practice. This study aimed to retrieve and summarize the best evidence on the administration of rhubarb in the treatment of acute pancreatitis and to provide a theoretical reference for the development of clinical practice. Methods: A systematic search was performed from database inception to 31 October, 2025 across multiple electronic databases and guideline repositories, including the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, China biomedical, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP. Eligible evidence comprised clinical practice guidelines, expert consensus statements, and systematic reviews focusing on rhubarb administration in adult patients with acute pancreatitis. The methodological quality of included studies was independently evaluated using the AGREE II, JBI, and AMSTAR 2.0 tools. Results: A total of 15 documents were included, including 3 clinical guidelines, 3 expert consensus, and 9 systematic evaluations. Twenty-seven pieces of evidence related to rhubarb administration in patients with acute pancreatitis were extracted and summarized into four themes: mechanism of action, feasibility, evaluation, and clinical implementation. Conclusion: Healthcare providers may apply the best evidence for rhubarb administration in acute pancreatitis to improve intestinal function recovery. However, recommendations should be interpreted cautiously, as all evidence comes from Chinese studies with limited generalizability and some low-level findings. This study is in accordance with the evidence summary reporting specifications of the Fudan University Center for the Evidence-based Nursing, and the registration number is "ES20246947".
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.