ReviewJournal of integrative medicine2022
Traditional Chinese medicine treatment for COVID-19: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Review in Journal of integrative medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Shining light on knee osteoarthritis: an overview of vitamin D supplementation studies.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Traditional Chinese Medicine for Viral Pneumonia Therapy: Pharmacological Basis and Mechanistic Insights.International journal of biological sciences · 2025Review
- Interferon Point Alteration in Hospitalized Patients with and Without COVID-19.Medical acupuncture · 2024Article
- Exploring the Molecular Mechanism of Niuxi-Mugua Formula in Treating Coronavirus Disease 2019Current computer-aided drug design · 2024Article
- Exploring the mechanism of agarwood moxa smoke in treating sleep disorders based on GC-MS and network pharmacology.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Evaluating deep learning techniques for identifying tongue features in subthreshold depression: a prospective observational study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Use of integrative and complementary practices in Brazil during the COVID-19 pandemic.PloS one · 2024Article
- Efficacy of Kan JangPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Fangchinoline inhibits the PEDV replication in intestinal epithelial cells via autophagic flux suppression.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Practices, Knowledge, and Attitudes of Chinese University Students Toward Traditional Chinese Herbal Medicine for the Control of COVID-19.Infection and drug resistance · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a rapidly spreading disease that has caused an extensive burden to the world. Consequently, a large number of clinical trials have examined the efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) for treating and preventing COVID-19, with coinciding proliferation of reviews summarizing these studies.
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the methodological quality and evidence quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the efficacy of TCM. SEARCH STRATEGY: Seven electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chongqing VIP, Wanfang Data and SinoMed, were searched for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in October 2021. Search terms such as "Chinese medicine," "Lianhua Qingwen" and "COVID-19" were used. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials that evaluated the efficacy of TCM treatment of COVID-19 were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews Version 2.0 (AMSTAR 2) was used to evaluate the methodological quality. The quality of evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Data extraction and analysis were performed by two reviewers independently.
resultsThere were 17 meta-analyses included in our overview. The intervention group was defined as TCM combined with Western medicine, while the control group was Western medicine alone. The methodological quality of all the included studies was moderate to poor. A total of 89 outcome indicators were evaluated, of which, 8 were rated as moderate quality, 39 as low quality, and 41 as very low quality. Only one outcome measure was graded as being of high quality. The moderate quality of evidence indicated that, for the treatment of COVID-19, the clinical efficacy of TCM in combination with Western medicine was better, in terms of lung recovery, rate of conversion to severe/critical cases, symptom scores, duration of symptoms, mortality, and length of hospital stay.
conclusionEvidence from the included studies shows that, compared with conventional Western medical therapy alone, the addition of TCM to COVID-19 treatment may improve clinical outcomes. Overall, the quality of evidence of TCM for COVID-19 was moderate to poor. Meta-analyses of the use of TCM in the treatment of COVID-19 can be used for clinical decision making by accounting for the experiences of clinical experts, medical policies, and other factors.
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.