MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016439908 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000000442

Effects of Traditional Chinese Patent Medicine on Essential Hypertension

2015· review· en· W2016439908 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraditional Chinese Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCochrane LibraryMeta-analysisMEDLINEAdverse effectSystematic reviewClinical trialBlood pressureInternal medicineIntensive care medicineTraditional medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional Chinese patent medicine (TCPM) is widely used for essential hypertension (EH) in China. However, there is no critically appraised evidence, such as systematic reviews or meta-analyses, regarding the potential benefits and disadvantages of TCPM to justify their clinical use and recommendation. The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate and meta-analyze the effects of TCPM for EH. Seven databases, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Chinese Scientific Journal Database, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and the Wanfang Database, were searched from their inception to August 2014 for relevant studies that compared one TCPM plus antihypertensive drugs versus antihypertensive drugs alone. The methodological quality of the included trials was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The primary outcome measures were mortality or progression to severe complications and adverse events. The secondary outcome measures were blood pressure (BP) and quality of life (QOL). Seventy-three trials, which included 8138 patients, on 17 TCPMs were included. In general, the methodological quality was low. Two trials evaluated the effects of TCPMs on mortality and the progression to severe complications after treatment, and no significant difference was identified compared with antihypertensive drugs alone. No severe adverse events were reported. Thirteen TCPMs used in complementary therapy significantly decreased systolic BP by 3.94 to 13.50 mmHg and diastolic BP by 2.28 to 11.25 mmHg. QOL was significantly improved by TCPM plus antihypertensive drugs compared with antihypertensive drugs alone. This systematic review provided the first classification of clinical evidence for the effectiveness of TCPM for EH. The usage of TCPMs for EH was supported by evidence of class level III. As a result of the methodological drawbacks of the included studies, more rigorously designed randomized controlled trials that focus on mortality and cardiovascular events during long-term follow-up are warranted before TCPM can be recommended for hypertensive patients. Two TCPMs, Song ling xue mai kang capsules and Yang xue qing nao granules, should be prioritized for further research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.156
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it