Meta AnalysisID 98
植物疗法能否在普通医学的当前适应证中作为常规治疗的可靠替代方案？对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?
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
- 98
- Evidence Id
- 8656
- Core Evidence Id
- 8656
- Source Meta Analysis Id
- 89
- Herb2 Meta Analysis Id
- HBMA000089
- 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常规治疗的可靠替代方案？对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