SynthesisJournal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA2025
Far-infrared therapy on arteriovenous fistula among hemodialysis patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA, 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.
- Far-Infrared Therapy: Mechanisms of Action.Circulation reports · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFar-infrared (FIR) is one of the alternative therapies used to improve the performance of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) in hemodialysis patients. This review was done to pool the mean difference of vascular access flow and AVF diameter between the FIR and the control group. It also pooled the risk ratio of 1-year unassisted AVF patency, AVF occlusion, surgical intervention, and AVF malfunction between groups.
methodsThe studies were reviewed using a systematic review, meta-analysis, and a search of four databases. The risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) and the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias instrument for randomized trials (RoB-2) were used to assess the data quality. The meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model by inverse variance to measure the mean difference for continuous data and the Mantel-Haenszel method for dichotomous data.
resultsFIR therapy group had a significant difference in risk ratio in 1-year unassisted AVF patency (risk ratio: 1.23 [95% CI, 1.12-1.36]), AVF occlusion (risk ratio: 0.24 [95% CI, 0.08-0.68]), surgical intervention (risk ratio: 0.45 [95% CI, 0.23-0.86]), and AVF malfunction (risk ratio: 0.44 [95% CI, 0.30-0.62]) compared with the control group. However, for vascular access flow and AVF diameter, there was no difference between the groups (mean difference: 68.38 [95% CI, -3.84 to 140.61] and -0.07 [95% CI, -0.31 to 0.17], respectively).
conclusionThe findings showed that the FIR therapy improved AVF performance. However, the limited number of studies primarily from Taiwanese may act differently from others.
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.