MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416089039 · doi:10.1177/27683605251394592

Acupoint Therapy for Enhancing Cognitive Function in Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2025· review· en· W4416089039 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Beijie Sun, Qinhui Fu, Yew Yen Grace Lau, Yijun Zhan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcupuncture Treatment Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialCognitive impairmentActivities of daily livingMeta-analysisClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction:Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) signifies a transitional phase between normal aging and dementia. As the disease progresses, MCI patients face considerable challenges due to the deterioration in cognitive function, activities of daily living (ADL), and neuropsychiatric symptoms. This study aims to evaluate the evidence regarding the application of acupoint therapy in individuals with MCI based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods:Six databases were searched to September 25, 2025, for RCTs comparing acupoint therapy (alone or combined with nonpharmacological treatments) with health education, blank or waiting groups, sham interventions, and standard treatments (nonpharmacological treatments or oral medications). Outcomes included Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Data on ADL scale, relevant biomarkers, and safety data were extracted where available. After the process of literature review and data collection, risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0. Meta-analyses were performed employing the Review Manager (version 5.4.1). Results:Twenty-four trials comprising 2005 patients were analyzed. Acupoint therapy improved the overall cognitive function of MCI patients (MoCA: mean difference [MD] = 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.95, 1.99], p < 0.00001; MMSE: MD = 1.44, 95% CI: [1.03, 1.86], p < 0.00001). MoCA and MMSE scores after acupoint therapy were significantly higher than those of health education control (MoCA: MD = 2.63, 95% CI: [1.19, 4.07], p = 0.0003; MMSE: MD = 2.83, 95% CI: [2.14, 3.51], p < 0.00001), sham control (MoCA: MD = 0.94, 95% CI: [0.18, 1.69], p = 0.01; MMSE: MD = 1.29, 95% CI: [0.51, 2.08], p = 0.001), standard nonpharmacological control (MoCA: MD = 1.42, 95% CI: [0.81, 2.03], p < 0.00001; MMSE: MD = 1.09, 95% CI: [0.79, 1.40], p < 0.00001), and oral-medication control (MoCA: MD = 0.52, 95% CI: [0.06, 0.98], p = 0.03; MMSE: MD = 0.91, 95% CI: [0.22, 1.61], p = 0.01), but no difference versus blank control (MoCA: MD = −1.10, 95% CI: [−4.58, 2.38], p = 0.54; MMSE: MD = 1.80, 95% CI: [−0.92, 4.52], p = 0.20). Auricular acupressure improved ADL scores. Biomarker changes remained nonsignificant. Only nine studies reported safety events with heterogeneous definitions, leaving the risk–benefit ratio unclear. Conclusion:Acupoint therapy is beneficial for cognitive function in MCI patients. Additional high-quality research is needed to provide a reliable basis for the management of MCI through acupoint therapy.

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)0.001
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: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Integrative and Complementary MedicineSame topicAcupuncture Treatment Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207