ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2026
Efficacy and safety of chaishituire granules in influenza treatment: a multi-center, randomized, double-blind, parallel-controlled clinical trial.
Article in American journal of translational research, 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
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesInformation on the safety and efficacy of chaishituire granules (CSTR) for treating influenza is limited. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of CSTR in shortening the disease and fever course and improving the traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) syndrome score in influenza treatment.
methodsThis multi-center, randomized, positive-drug, parallel-controlled study involved 17 hospitals across China and 221 patients with influenza aged 14-75 years. These patients met the syndrome differentiation criteria for "Wind-Heat Invading the Wei-Exterior". Patients in the CSTR group received CSTR and oseltamivir phosphate dummy capsules, whereas those in the oseltamivir control group received oseltamivir phosphate capsules and CSTR dummy granules. The primary outcomes were the time to complete remission of fever and the main clinical symptoms. The secondary outcomes were the time to elicit antipyretic effects, acetaminophen use, TCM syndrome score, remission rate of main clinical symptoms, single symptom area under the curve (AUC), and the incidence of complications or severe/critical diseases.
resultsThe TCM syndrome score, single symptom AUC, incidence of complications and severe/critical disease, time to complete remission of fever, main clinical symptoms, and initiation of antipyretic effects were evaluated. However, CSTR demonstrated a more rapid action and superior efficacy in alleviating sore throat compared to oseltamivir. The incidence of adverse reactions was similar between the groups.
conclusionsCSTR could be an alternative therapy for influenza virus infections.
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.