↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of Traditional Chinese Acupuncture versus Sham Acupuncture: a Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effectiveness of Traditional Chinese Acupuncture versus Sham Acupuncture: a Systematic Review
Published in
Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem, August 2016
DOI 10.1590/1518-8345.0647.2762
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luís Carlos, Lóris Aparecida Prado da Cruz, Vanessa Cristina Leopoldo, Fabrício Ribeiro de Campos, Ana Maria de Almeida, Renata Cristina de Campos Pereira Silveira

Abstract

to identify and synthesize the evidence from randomized clinical trials that tested the effectiveness of traditional Chinese acupuncture in relation to sham acupuncture for the treatment of hot flashes in menopausal women with breast cancer. systematic review guided by the recommendations of the Cochrane Collaboration. Citations were searched in the following databases: MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and LILACS. A combination of the following keywords was used: breast neoplasm, acupuncture, acupuncture therapy, acupuncture points, placebos, sham treatment, hot flashes, hot flushes, menopause, climacteric, and vasomotor symptoms. a total of 272 studies were identified, five of which were selected and analyzed. Slight superiority of traditional acupuncture compared with sham acupuncture was observed; however, there were no strong statistical associations. the evidence gathered was not sufficient to affirm the effectiveness of traditional acupuncture compared with sham acupuncture. identificar e sintetizar as evidências oriundas de ensaios clínicos randomizados que testaram a efetividade da acupuntura tradicional chinesa em relação à sham acupuntura para o tratamento dos fogachos em mulheres com câncer de mama no climatério. revisão sistemática guiada pelas recomendações da Colaboração Cochrane. A busca foi realizada nas bases de dados: MEDLINE via PubMed, Web of Science, CENTRAL Cochrane, CINAHL e LILACS. Adotou-se a combinação dos descritores: breast neoplasm, acupuncture, acupuncture therapy, acupuncture points, placebos, sham treatment, hot flashes, hot flushes, menopause, climacteric, vasomotor symptoms. foram identificados 272 estudos, sendo 5 selecionados e analisados. Foi observada discreta superioridade da acupuntura tradicional em relação à sham, entretanto, sem fortes associações estatísticas. as evidências obtidas não foram suficientes para afirmar quanto à efetividade da acupuntura tradicional em relação à sham. Identificar y sintetizar la evidencia de un ensayo clínico aleatorizado que examinó la eficacia de la acupuntura tradicional en relación a la acupuntura sham para el tratamiento de sofocos en las mujeres menopáusicas con cáncer de mama. Revisión sistemática guiada por las recomendaciones de la Colaboración Cochrane. Las referencias bibliográficas se buscaron en las siguientes bases de datos: MEDLINE vía PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL y LILACS. Se utilizó una combinación de las siguientes palabras clave: breast neoplasm, acupuncture, acupuncture therapy, acupuncture points, placebos, sham treatment, hot flashes, hot flushes, menopause, climacteric, vasomotor symptoms. Se identificó un total de 272 estudios, cinco de los cuales fueron seleccionados y analizados. Se encontró una ligera superioridad de la acupuntura tradicional comparada con la acupuntura sham; sin embargo, no se encontraron asociaciones estadísticas fuertes. La evidencia obtenida no fue suficiente para confirmar la eficacia de la acupuntura tradicional comparada con la acupuntura sham.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 125 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 14%
Student > Master 13 10%
Researcher 10 8%
Professor 7 6%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 25 20%
Unknown 45 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 46 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 January 2020.
All research outputs
#14,387,928
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem
#262
of 842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,058
of 356,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem
#14
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 842 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
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 356,506 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.