SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Fire dragon cupping therapy for primary dysmenorrhea: a systematic review of available clinical evidence and research gaps.
Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Fire Dragon Cupping Therapy (FDCT) combines negative-pressure cupping with controlled thermal stimulation, moving-cup manipulation, and acupoint stimulation, and is increasingly used for primary dysmenorrhea (PD), but its clinical evidence remains uncertain. Objective: To identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of FDCT for PD and, when no eligible RCTs were found, to map direct non-randomized and indirect contextual evidence. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched from inception to March 2026. Eligible primary studies were evaluating FDCT alone or as an adjunct in women with PD. Direct non-randomized FDCT studies and indirect studies of related cupping or Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) interventions were summarized separately and were not used to estimate FDCT effectiveness. Results: Among 890 records, 248 remained after duplicate removal and 80 full-text reports were assessed; no RCT met the primary eligibility criteria. One retrospective comparative study of 112 patients provided the most informative direct evidence: 58 received FDCT plus Shaofu Zhuyu Decoction and 54 received the decoction alone. Favorable post-treatment pain, TCM syndrome, uterine hemodynamic, endothelin-1, and nitric oxide findings were reported (all P < 0.05), but non-randomized allocation and the combined intervention precluded attribution to FDCT. Additional direct or contextual reports were heterogeneous and methodologically limited. Certainty of evidence was very low, and safety reporting was insufficient. Conclusion: Current evidence is insufficient to establish the efficacy or safety of FDCT for PD. Adequately powered multicenter RCTs using standardized FDCT protocols, validated outcomes, appropriate comparators, and systematic adverse-event monitoring are required.
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.