MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317840269 · doi:10.1155/2023/9242752

Effect of Proprietary Chinese Medicine on Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction in Patients with Microvascular Angina: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

2023· review· en· W4317840269 on OpenAlexaff
Qiuyu Yu, Xiaoyu Xu, Shun Wang, Yu Fan, Jian Zhang, Yingshu Leng, Fumin Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersJiangsu Provincial Key Research and Development ProgramNanjing UniversityNanjing University of Chinese MedicineGovernment of Jiangsu Province
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisAnginaInternal medicineWeb of scienceMEDLINESystematic reviewCardiologyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background . Microvascular angina (MVA) has received increasing attention and interest in recent years, but there are still some shortcomings in the diagnosis and treatments at current stage. In recent years, several studies have confirmed the efficacy of proprietary Chinese medicines (PCMs) in improving MVA symptoms; however, there is no systematic review and meta‐analysis to comprehensively assess the efficacy of PCMs in this area. Objective . Investigating the clinical efficacy of proprietary Chinese medicines for treating MVA and coronary microvascular function. Methods . We looked up articles from January 1, 2012, to the present from eight databases. Then, we screened the literature and followed the 2019 version 2 of Cochrane risk of bias tool for systematic review. The Stata/SE 15.0 software was used for the meta‐analysis. Results . There are 21 studies, including 1,641 patients who were included in this review. According to the results, the combination of PCMs and conventional MVA treatment was able to further enhance clinical efficacy [RR = 1.28, 95% CI (1.20, 1.36), p < 0.001], prolong the time of duration on the treadmill exercise testing (TET) [SMD = 1.49, 95% CI (0.63, 2.36), p = 0.001] and improve levels of NO [SMD = −1.77 95% CI (−2.11, −1.43), p < 0.001]. At the same time, PCMs could also decrease the microvascular resistance index (IMR) [SMD = −1.79, 95% CI (−2.58, −1.00), p < 0.001)], serum level of hs‐CRP [SMD = −1.21, 95% CI (−1.84, −0.58), p < 0.001] and ET‐1 [SMD = −1.77 95% CI (−2.11, −1.43), p < 0.001]. Regards to medication safety, a total of 27 adverse events occurred, including 10 cases in the intervention group and 17 cases in the control group. Conclusion . The study suggests that the combination of PCMs and conventional MVA treatment enhances clinical efficacy and could better improve coronary microvascular function. In the future, we expect more high‐quality, randomized, double‐blind clinical studies to validate the safety, and efficacy of PCMs to provide valuable evidence‐based medicine (EBM) for the treatment of MVA with PCMs.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-based Complementary and Alternative MedicineSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207