SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
Efficacy and safety of Chinese patent medicine for urinary tract infections: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Chinese patent medicines (CPMs) have garnered increasing attention as therapeutic options for urinary tract infections (UTIs); however, robust evidence supporting their efficacy remains limited. To address this gap, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) incorporating both direct and indirect comparisons to systematically evaluate and rank the efficacy and safety profiles of CPMs for UTIs. Methods: We systematically searched five electronic databases from their inception through April 2025. Data were analyzed using a frequentist approach with random-effects models. Results: Twenty-three studies with nine types of medicines and 3,250 patients were included in this study. While network meta-analysis suggested that Xueniaoan capsule with antibiotics (XNA_Ab) had the highest probability of being optimal, this conclusion requires cautious interpretation because of the low certainty of evidence from the included studies. Conclusion: Several CPMs demonstrate potential therapeutic benefits for UTIs; however, these preliminary findings require validation through rigorously designed large-scale randomized controlled trials.
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.