Meta AnalysisID 105

植物疗法能否在普通医学的当前适应证中作为传统治疗的可靠替代方案?Meta分析的系统评价

CRD42020208426

can phytotherapy present itself as a credible alternative to conventional treatments in certain common indications in general medicine?

Back to Browse

Relationship Network

Interactive first-hop connections across herbs, ingredients, formulas, targets, diseases, symptoms, syndromes, evidence, and monographs.

Click a node to open it in a new tab
Herb: 1Meta-analysis: 1Links: 1
Arranging relationship network...

Record Fields

Scalar fields from the final meta_analysis record.

Meta Analysis Id
105
Evidence Id
8663
Core Evidence Id
8663
Source Meta Analysis Id
94
Herb2 Meta Analysis Id
HBMA000094
Crd Id
CRD42020208426
Title
Can phytotherapy present itself as a credible alternative to conventional treatments in current indications in general medicine? Systematic review of meta-analyzes
Review Question
can phytotherapy present itself as a credible alternative to conventional treatments in certain common indications in general medicine?
Study Type Included
We included in our study the meta-analyzes answering our research question as well as the RCTs they included. We have chosen to include relatively recent studies, published between 2014 and 2019. If several studies addressed the same research question, we favored the most recent one. We have eliminated articles sometimes when reading the title, sometimes when reading the summary, sometimes when reading the full text. We systematically eliminated those for which the assessment of the methodological quality of the studies was not done according to GRADE. We performed a literature search manually, using the bibliography of articles read.
Condition Being Studied
-gynecology (dysmenorrhea, nausea pregnancy, climateric syndrom) -rhumatology : osteroarthritis pain and low-back pain -abdominal pain : functional bowel disorder -neurology (depression, insomnia)
Participant
The populations studied were men or women over 15 years old (threshold set arbitrarily), with no upper age limit, presenting the various pathologies that we included as an indication in our research.
Animal
Human Disease Modelled
Intervention
The interventions studied were the intake of medicinal plants, mainly in the form of capsules of powdered plants. Choice of plants studied: To choose the plants to study, we considered the criterion of frequency of use, but to our knowledge there is no register listing the different plants in order of frequency of use. We therefore selected the plants to be studied from different sources mentioning the plants most commonly used in Europe and particularly in France, and recommended by phytotherapy companies. We limited our study to plants listed in the French pharmacopoeia list A : Zingiber Officinale (Ginger) Matricaria Chamomila (matricaria) Vitex Agnus Castus (chaste tree) Zingiber Officinale(zinger) Cimifuga racemosa (black cohosh) Isoflavones Vaccinium macrocarpon (cranberry) Arctostaphylos uva ursi (bearberry) Echinacea purpurea (echinacea) Sambucus Nigra (black elderberry) Thymus vulgaris (thyme) Curcuma Longa (turmeric) Boswellia Serrata (Boswellie) Salix alba (white willow) Harpagophytum Procumbens (harpagophytum) C. frutescens Mentha Piperita (peppermint) Hypericum Perforatum Crocus Sativus (saffron) Matricaria Chamomilla (matricaria) Valeriana Officinalis (valerian) Passiflora incarnata (passionflower)
Comparator Control
Placebo or reference traitement
Main Outcome
The results presented had to include clinically relevant endpoints: The main outcomes were a reduction in symptoms related to the pathology studied, in particular, depending on the indications studied, reduction in the pain score, or reduction in the depression score. The appearance of adverse effects of the treatment considered important, the functional improvement concerning the indications of the osteo-articular sphere were considered as secondary endpoints (extracted manually). Measures of effect For each PICO, meta-analyzes were extracted to quantify the results: -For dichotomous data, the relative risks and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). -For quantitative data, mean differences (MD), or standard mean differences (SMD) with 95% CI. If this interval includes the value 0 for DMS, it is considered not significant. If it includes the value 1 for ORs or RRs, the results are considered insignificant. -Heterogeneity (I²).
Outcome Measure
Additional Outcome
We performed a secondary analysis by selecting RCTs showing a statistically significant effect on the primary outcome, regardless of risk of bias, in order to compare and discuss our two analyzes. Measures of effect -For dichotomous data, the relative risks and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). -For quantitative data, mean differences (MD), or standard mean differences (SMD) with 95% CI. If this interval includes the value 0 for DMS, it is considered not significant. If it includes the value 1 for ORs or RRs, the results are considered insignificant. -Heterogeneity (I²).
Study Method
Méta-analyse, Revue systématique
Keyword
Complementary Therapies; Humans; Phytotherapy
Contact
angélique HONORE [email protected]
Organisational Affiliation
Université de Lyon 1, France https://lyon-est.univ-lyon1.fr/
Funding Source
Other Selection Criteria
Final Publication
Same Topic Review
Published Protocol
Review Type
Language
English, French
Country
France
Review Stage
Review Ongoing
First Submission Date
2020-10-10
Registration Date
2020-11-10
Anticipated Start Date
2020-06-01
Anticipated Completion Date
2021-02-28
Title Cn
植物疗法能否在普通医学的当前适应证中作为传统治疗的可靠替代方案?Meta分析的系统评价
Title En
Can phytotherapy present itself as a credible alternative to conventional treatments in current indications in general medicine? Systematic review of meta-analyzes
Bilingual Status
complete