SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Comparative efficacy of topical commercial Chinese polyherbal preparation for vulvovaginal candidiasis: a network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Intravaginal Formulation Strategies for Vaginal Disorders: Optimizing Phytochemical and Biological Preparations-A Review.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically evaluate the differences in the efficacy of commonly used topical commercial Chinese polyherbal preparations (CCPPs) for vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC), and to provide evidence-based reference for clinical drug regimens. Methods: Computer searched major Chinese and English literature databases, and collected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of external use of CCPPs combined with conventional treatment (CT, test group) versus CT alone (control group) in patients with VVC. After screening the literature, the quality of the included studies was assessed using the risk of bias assessment tool recommended in 5.3 of the Cochrane Handbook. Outcome data for each outcome measure were extracted and a network meta-analysis was performed using Stata 15.0. Results: A total of 74 RCTs with a total of 8,151 patients were included, nine interventions were involved. The results of network meta-analysis showed that, Fufang Shajiziyou suppository combined with CT was more effective in improving the negative conversion rate and controlling the recurrence rate of Conclusion: The addition of CCPPs to CT may acquire a better curative effect in patients with VVC and external does not significantly increase the occurrence of adverse reactions. However, due to the low quality of the included literature, larger-scale, higher-quality clinical studies are still needed. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, NO: CRD42023410244.
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.