SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026
A methodological review of acupuncture for chronic atrophic gastritis: toward a core outcome set.
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.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture for chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG) published over the past 25 years, aiming to analyze the current status of clinical research, with a focus on evaluating heterogeneity in outcome measures and methodological quality. Methods: A comprehensive search of major Chinese and English databases identified 55 RCTs involving 5,311 patients. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Outcome measures were categorized and analyzed by frequency. Results: The results revealed notable methodological limitations in the current literature. Only 83.6% of the studies employed low-risk randomization methods, while very few implemented allocation concealment (3.6%) or blinding (1.8%). Furthermore, no study reported prospective registration, and 34.5% did not mention ethical approval. Regarding outcome measures, 57 different indicators were reported, with laboratory and imaging examinations accounting for the majority (55.4%). Notably, there was a severe lack of focus on patient-reported quality of life, health economic evaluation, and long-term disease prognosis. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in the naming, definition, and timing of outcome measurements, and most studies failed to clearly distinguish between primary and secondary outcomes. Discussion: In conclusion, the absence of clear criteria hinders clinical translation and results in fragmented data in existing clinical studies on acupuncture treatment for CAG. Standardized clinical trial protocols and a core outcome set (COS) for this discipline are urgently needed. Building on this foundation, future research should conduct multicenter, large-sample, methodologically robust RCTs with long-term follow-up. Such efforts will scientifically advance the standardized development of acupuncture clinical practice and produce high-quality, generalizable, evidence-based conclusions.
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.