Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35754695›Full record

ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2022

Treatment of the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease with Chinese Herbal Medicine (BanxiaXiexin Decoction): Evidence from Meta-Analysis.

Jiali Liu, Jinke Huang, Beihua Zhang, Xiaolan Yin, Mi Lv, Zhihong Liu, Fengyun Wang, Xudong Tang

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jiali LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6269-1896
Jinke HuangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5623-0564
Beihua ZhangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8874-8328
Xiaolan YinDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6563-0685
Mi LvDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1715-8643
Zhihong LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Peking University Traditional Chinese Medicine Clinical Medical School (Xiyuan), Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1631-9636
Fengyun WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4058-7905
Xudong TangInstitute of Gastroenterology, Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0391-3895
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNPeking University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) are still controversial on the effectiveness of Banxia Xiexin decoction (BXD) to treat gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). To assess the evidence reliability and inform the clinical use of BXD, we performed a meta-analysis from previous SRs/MAs to collate, critically appraise, and synthesize the effectiveness of BXD treatment in GERD. Methods: SRs/MAs were collected by searching major medical databases. The included studies were evaluated in terms of methodological quality and quality of evidence using criteria from the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2) tool, and the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system, respectively. Results: Six SRs/MAs were included in this study. The methodological quality of SRs/MAs was generally unsatisfactory. Unregistered protocols, failure to provide a list of excluded trials, and lack of a comprehensive search strategy were the main limitations of previous SRs/MAs. No high-quality evidence was found to support the effect of BXD on GERD patients. The qualitative data synthesis relied on low-quality trials with a small sample size, which was the main factor for evidence degradation. Conclusions: BXD seems to have promising efficacy to treat GERD patients. Although the quality of SRs/MAs was generally low and defects were frequent, our study highlights areas where methodologies need to be improved.

Identifiers

PMID35754695
PMCPMC9217598
OpenAlexW4282963875

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.