| Title |
A Meta-Analysis of Chinese Herbal Medicine in Treatment of Managed Withdrawal from Heroin
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology, June 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10571-008-9290-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ting-ting Liu, Jie Shi, David H. Epstein, Yan-Ping Bao, Lin Lu |
| Abstract |
Chinese herbal medicine has shown promise for heroin detoxification. This review extends a prior meta-analysis of Chinese herbal medicine for heroin detoxification, with particular attention to the time course of symptoms. Both English and Chinese databases were searched for randomized trials comparing Chinese herbal medicine to either alpha2-adrenergic agonists or opioid agonists for heroin detoxification. The methodological quality of each study was assessed with Jadad's scale (1-2 = low; 3-5 = high). Meta-analysis was performed with fixed- or random-effect models in RevMan software; outcome measures assessed were withdrawal-symptoms score, anxiety, and adverse effects of treatment. Twenty-one studies (2,949 participants) were included. For withdrawal-symptoms score relieving during the 10-day observation, Chinese herbal medicine was superior to alpha2-adrenergic agonists in relieving opioid-withdrawal symptoms during 4-10 days (except D8) and no difference was found within the first 3 days. Compared with opioid agonists, Chinese herbal medicine was inferior during the first 3 days, but the difference became non-significant during days 4-9. Chinese herbal medicine has better effect on anxiety relieving at late stage of intervention than alpha2-adrenergic agonists, and no difference with opioid agonists. The incidence of some adverse effects (fatigue, dizziness) was significantly lower for Chinese herbal medicine than for alpha2-adrenergic agonists (sufficient data for comparison with opioid agonists were not available). Findings were robust to file-drawer effects. Our meta-analysis suggests that Chinese herbal medicine is an effective and safety treatment for heroin detoxification. And more work is needed to determine the specific effects of specific forms of Chinese herbal medicine. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 15% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 14 | 27% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 33% |
| Psychology | 5 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 21% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 June 2013.
All research outputs
#15,916,457
of 25,639,676 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology
#617
of 1,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,684
of 96,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,639,676 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,104 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 96,733 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.