ReviewChinese medicine2022
The efficacy and safety of combined chinese herbal medicine and western medicine therapy for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Chinese medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review and network meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing anti-tuberculosis drug induced liver injury.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- Combination of Chinese herbal medicine and conventional western medicine for coronavirus disease 2019: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Effectiveness and Safety of Liuwei Dihuang as an Adjunctive Therapy for Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Network Pharmacology Analysis.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Protective effect of Huashi Baidu formula against AKI and active ingredients that target SphK1 and PAI-1.Chinese medicine · 2024Article
- Pathogenic mechanisms of cardiovascular damage in COVID-19.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Review
- Efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine for cancer-related fatigue: a systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials.Chinese medicine · 2023Review
- Effectiveness of Fortified Garlic Extract Oral Capsules as Adjuvant Therapy in Hospitalized Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Triple-Blind Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.Current therapeutic research, clinical and experimental · 2023Article
- The Efficacy and Safety of Shashen-Maidong Decoction Combined with Western Medicine in the Treatment of Omicron Infected Individuals Over 85 Years Old: A Retrospective Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2023Article
- Long-Term Vaccination and Treatment Strategies for COVID-19 Disease and Future Coronavirus Pandemics.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically review the clinical efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) with and without Western medicine (WM) for different severity of COVID-19.
methodsCNKI, PubMed, Wanfang Database, ClinicalTrails.gov, Embase, ChiCTR and ICTRP were searched from 01 Jan, 2020 to 30 Jun, 2021. Two authors independently assessed all the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for trial inclusion, data extraction and quality assessment. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager software (RevMan 5.4.1). Evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcomes included total effectiveness rate. Secondary outcomes included improvements in symptom improvement and total adverse event rate. Different severity of COVID-19 patients was assessed in subgroup analysis. This study was registered with INPLASY, INPLASY202210072.
results22 high quality RCTs involving 1789 participants were included. There were no trial used CHM alone nor compare placebo or no treatment. Compared with WM, combined CHM and WM (CHM-WM) treatment showed higher total effectiveness rate, lower symptom scores of fever, cough, fatigue, dry throat and pharyngalgia, shorter mean time to viral conversion, better Computerized Tomography (CT) image and blood results, fewer total adverse events and worse conditions (P < 0.05). Subgroup analysis showed that the total effectiveness rate of combined CHM-WM group was significantly higher than WM group, especially for mild and moderate patients. No significant differences in mortality and adverse events were found between combined CHM-WM and WM treatment. No serious adverse events and long-term outcomes were reported.
conclusionCurrent evidence supported the therapeutic effects and safety of combined CHM-WM treatment on COVID-19, especially for patients with mild and moderate symptoms. Long-term effects of therapy are worthy in further study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.