ArticleBMC complementary medicine and therapies2025
Prescription patterns of traditional Chinese medications and potential consequences in patients with new-onset cardiac or vascular-related diseases: a nationwide cohort study.
Article in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe patterns of Chinese medicine prescriptions, corresponding diagnoses, co-morbidities, and Western medication (WM) use among patients with cardiac or vascular-related diseases are uncertain. This research aimed to examine the patterns of Chinese medications (CMs, specifically in terms of extract granules), corresponding diagnoses, co-morbidities, and the use of WMs within specified follow-up periods among patients with potential of recurrent cardiac or vascular-related diseases and relevant outcomes.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. We enrolled patients with newly diagnosed cardiac or vascular-related diseases without cancer(s), transplantation, bleeding diagnoses, or catastrophic illness during the 2-year period prior to the corresponding diagnosis. Prior and non-prior CM users were matched based on their propensity scores. Finally, we compared the CM and WM patterns prescribed by physicians, and co-morbidities in the 6 months following the diagnosis and the secondary cardiac or vascular-related events in the 2 years following the diagnosis between the two groups using the standardized mean difference.
resultsOf 191,025 patients with newly diagnosed cardiac or vascular-related diseases, 39,341 (20.60%) were prescribed CMs. Moreover, after propensity score matching, we identified 39,168 prior CM users and 39,168 non-prior CM users. Regardless of prior CM use, both groups had a relatively high rate of comorbidities; CM or specific WM use; and incidence of severe cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, or thromboembolic events (33.81% vs. 31.97%) and severe bleeding (18.32% vs. 16.57%). Only CM exposure within 6 months after the index date differed significantly between the groups (73.51% vs. 30.34%).
conclusionWe found that over 30% of patients with newly diagnosed cardiac or vascular disease initiated CM use, while 73.5% of prior CM users continued. This finding highlights the need for healthcare professionals to carefully assess the risk-to-benefit ratio of CM use alongside WMs for patients with cardiac or vascular-related diseases.
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.