Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42051256›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2026

Efficacy and safety of

Jingchao Miao, Yaoyuan Liu, Huichuan Feng, Shujie Zan, Changhong Miao, Jiabao Wang, Xinyao Jin, Fengwen Yang, Wentai Pang

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jingchao MiaoEvidence-Based Medicine Center, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
Yaoyuan LiuEvidence-Based Medicine Center, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
Huichuan FengFirst Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
Shujie ZanFirst Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
Changhong MiaoFirst Teaching Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
Jiabao WangEvidence-Based Medicine Center, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
Xinyao JinEvidence-Based Medicine Center, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
Fengwen YangEvidence-Based Medicine Center, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.
Wentai PangEvidence-Based Medicine Center, Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Shuxuening injection (SXNI), a standardized injectable formulation of Methods: Randomized controlled trials published before 1 September 2025, were searched in eight databases. Patients had vascular cognitive impairment (VCI), with the control group receiving conventional treatment and the treatment group receiving additional SXNI therapy. The primary outcome was the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), while secondary outcomes included the Hasegawa Dementia Scale (HDS), Barthel Index (BI), overall response rate, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), and adverse event incidence. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Risk ratios (RR) were used for binary variables; mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used for continuous variables. Results: Twenty-two trials (n = 2,375) were included. All trials were conducted in China between 2005 and 2025. Compared with the control group, SXNI was associated with higher MMSE (MD 3.61, 95% CI 3.06-4.17), HDS (MD 1.30, 95% CI 0.21-2.39), and BI (MD 9.06, 95% CI 4.66-13.45), a higher overall response rate (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.21-1.33), and lower NIHSS (MD -6.17, 95% CI -7.90 to -4.45). Seven studies reported adverse events; and there was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.36-1.44). Conclusion: The addition of SXNI to conventional treatment may provide additional benefits in cognition, neurological function, and activities of daily living with no significant increase in reported adverse events compared with conventional treatment. However, the certainty of evidence is limited by methodological weaknesses and uncertainty regarding the comparability of preparations from different manufacturers. Therefore, high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=557472, identifier CRD42024557472.

Indexed as

Ginkgo biloba leaf extract injectionmeta-analysisShuxuening injectionsystematic reviewvascular cognitive impairment

Identifiers

PMID42051256
PMCPMC13111442

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.