SynthesisCombinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening2026
Effectiveness and Safety of Butyphthalide Injection in Treatment of Aphasia after Cerebral Infarction: A Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveThe objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of butylphthalide injection in the treatment of aphasia after cerebral infarction.
methodsCNKI, Wanfang database, Duxiu, VIP, CBM, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Socolar databases were searched from the establishment of the database to August 2024. According to the topic of butylphthalide injection treated aphasia after cerebral infarction, the eligible RCT was selected and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software and stata16 software. Two researchers independently screened the study, extracted the basic information in the study, and assessed the risk of bias in the study.
resultsA total of 1047 patients were included in 12 RCTs, including 524 patients in the experimental group (butylphthalide injection + conventional/special speech rehabilitation training) and 523 patients in the control group (conventional/special speech rehabilitation). The results of meta-analysis showed that the total clinical efficacy of the experimental group was better than that of the control group (RR=1.28, 95%CI: 1.16-1.41, Z=5.11, P < 0.00001). The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score of the experimental group was lower than that of the control group (conventional language rehabilitation training group: MD=-4.11,95%CI: - 4.44~-3.78, Z=24.38, P < 0.00001; special language rehabilitation training group: MD=-2.53, 95%CI: -3.77 ~ -1.28, Z=3.97, P < 0.00001). Aphasia Quotient (AQ) scores of experimental groups were higher than those of control group (conventional language rehabilitation training group: MD=11.10, 95%CI: 10.26 ~ 11.94, Z=25.97, P<0.00001; special language rehabilitation training group: MD=5.23, 95%CI: 3.34~7.11, Z=5.44, P<0.00001); Adverse reactions: P>0.05, no statistical significance.
conclusionButylphthalide injection is effective and safe in the treatment of aphasia after cerebral infarction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40304338What 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.