Observational studyMedicine2026
Clinical efficacy of integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine in patients with coronary artery disease.
Observational study 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Although guideline-directed Western medical therapy improves cardiovascular outcomes, residual symptoms remain common. Integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine is frequently used as an adjunctive strategy in China, but its real-world, short-term clinical associations require further characterization. This retrospective observational study included 215 patients with CAD treated between January 2022 and December 2024, including 106 patients receiving conventional Western medical therapy alone and 109 receiving adjunctive traditional Chinese medicine based on syndrome differentiation. Symptom status, laboratory parameters, overall clinical response, and documented adverse events were compared between groups. Because treatment allocation was nonrandom and the analyses were unadjusted for potential confounders, all between-group findings were interpreted as associations. No statistically significant differences were observed in the measured baseline demographic, clinical, or laboratory characteristics between the 2 groups. After treatment, the integrated-treatment group had lower rates of residual chest pain, chest tightness, and fatigue and greater changes in total cholesterol, triglycerides, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, fibrinogen, and D-dimer. The observed overall clinical response rate was higher in the integrated-treatment group (90.8% vs 76.4%, P = .004). Documented adverse-event incidence did not differ significantly between groups. In this retrospective real-world cohort, adjunctive traditional Chinese medicine was associated with greater short-term improvement in selected symptoms and laboratory parameters and a higher observed clinical response rate, without a detectable increase in documented short-term adverse events. These unadjusted observational findings are exploratory, do not establish causal superiority or improved cardiovascular prognosis, and are insufficient by themselves to modify current guideline-directed CAD practice.
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.