MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308550763 · doi:10.1111/jnu.12846

Effects of moxibustion on cognition and activities of daily living in <scp>post‐stroke</scp> cognitive impairment: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

2022· review· en· W4308550763 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fang Liu, Zecai Lyu, Shaohong Lin, Zhuang-Miao Li, Huoqin Xiu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Scholarship · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcupuncture Treatment Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Fujian Province
KeywordsMoxibustionMedicineRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisSystematic reviewCognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentPhysical therapyStroke (engine)MEDLINECognitive impairmentAcupunctureInternal medicinePsychiatryAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Post‐stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) imposes a huge burden on patients and society as a whole; however, unequivocally effective treatments for PSCI are still lacking. Therefore, the exploration of effective and safe non‐pharmacological treatment modalities for PSCI is a key imperative. Moxibustion has been widely used for cognitive rehabilitation; however, there is a paucity of systematic reviews of the available evidence. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the effectiveness of moxibustion for treatment of PSCI to provide evidence base for the treatment of PSCI with moxibustion. Objective To evaluate the efficacy of moxibustion in improving cognitive function and activities of daily living (ADLs) in patients with PSCI. Design Systematic review and meta‐analysis of RCTs. Participants Patients with a clinical diagnosis of PSCI. Review Methods Relevant studies published in English or Chinese were retrieved from ten databases until December 2021. RCTs that assessed the efficacy of moxibustion on cognitive functioning and ADL in patients with PSCI were included. Two reviewers independently identified the trials and extracted the data. Risk‐of‐bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Cochrane's Review Manager (RevMan 5.4) software was used for the meta‐analysis. Results Eighteen RCTs (1290 participants) qualified the inclusion criteria and were included. Compared with the control group, the addition of moxibustion significantly improved the cognitive function, evaluated using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) [pooled mean difference (MD): 2.27, 95% CI: 1.98, 2.55, I 2 = 22%]. The pooled MD of Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE) score was 1.85 (95% CI: 1.56, 2.15, I 2 = 26%), and the pooled odds ratios (OR) total effective rate was 4.74 (95% CI: 2.55, 8.80, I 2 = 0%) ( p &lt; 0.05 for all). Moxibustion also significantly improved ADL, assessed using Modified Barthel Index (MBI) (pooled MD = 4.10, 95% CI: 2.10 to 6.10, I 2 = 0%) and Barthel Index (pooled MD: 8.63, 95% CI: 7.47, 9.79, I 2 = 5%) ( p &lt; 0.05 for all). Conclusions Compared with control group, the addition of moxibustion significantly improved the cognition and ADL of patients with PSCI. Clinical Relevance Nurses can incorporate moxibustion into the rehabilitation nursing of PSCI.

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 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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.131
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.131
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0470.007
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing ScholarshipSame topicAcupuncture Treatment Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207