SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2026
Effects of fire dragon cupping therapy for patients with post-stroke shoulder-hand syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Shoulder-hand syndrome (SHS), as a significant complication of stroke, has seen a continuous increase in incidence. The Fire Dragon Cupping (FDC) therapy is an emerging cupping therapy (CT), and this study aims to summarize the clinical evidence of FDC therapy intervention for SHS, providing guidance for its application and development. Methods: We searched 11 databases from inception to December 12, 2025. Data were pooled using standardized mean differences (SMD) and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and 95% prediction intervals (PIs). To explore high heterogeneity, we prespecified subgroup analyses, univariate meta-regression, and Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA). Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using ROB-2 and the GRADE framework, respectively. Results: A total of 11 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) were included in this study, involving 1,087 patients. Notably, all these studies were from China. Pooled estimates indicated FDC might improve clinical efficacy (RR = 1.20, 95% CI:[1.12 to 1.28], 95% PI: [1.10-1.31], Conclusion: The apparent therapeutic benefits must be interpreted with extreme caution due to unresolvable severe heterogeneity, inherent lack of blinding, disparate control interventions, and limited generalizability due to an exclusive reliance on Chinese-language literature. Current evidence is insufficient to formulate strong clinical recommendations, future multi-center, adequately blinded RCTs are mandated.
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.