Oral Administration of East Asian Herbal Medicine for Peripheral Neuropathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Association Rule Analysis to Identify Core Herb Combinations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review aimed to comprehensively assess the efficacy and safety of oral East Asian herbal medicine (EAHM) for overall peripheral neuropathy (PN). In addition, an Apriori algorithm-based association rule analysis was performed to identify the core herb combination, thereby further generating useful hypotheses for subsequent drug discovery. A total of 10 databases were searched electronically from inception to July 2021. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing EAHM with conventional analgesic medication or usual care for managing PN were included. The RCT quality was appraised using RoB 2.0, and the random effects model was used to calculate the effect sizes of the included RCTs. The overall quality of evidence was evaluated according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. By analyzing the constituent herb data, the potential association rules of core herb combinations were explored. A total of 67 RCTs involving 5753 patients were included in this systematic review. In a meta-analysis, EAHM monotherapy and combined EAHM and western medicine therapy demonstrated substantially improved sensory nerve conduction velocity, motor nerve conduction velocity, and response rate. Moreover, EAHM significantly improved the incidence rate, pain intensity, Toronto clinical scoring system, and Michigan diabetic neuropathy score. The evidence grade was moderate to low due to the substantial heterogeneity among the studies. Nine association rules were identified by performing the association rule analysis on the extraction data of 156 EAHM herbs. Therefore, the constituents of the herb combinations with consistent association rules were Astragali Radix, Cinnamomi Ramulus, and Spatholobi Calulis. This meta-analysis supports the hypothesis that EAHM monotherapy and combined therapy may be beneficial for PN patients, and follow-up research should be conducted to confirm the precise action target of the core herb.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".