↓ Skip to main content

Shenmai injection as an adjuvant treatment for chronic cor pulmonale heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Shenmai injection as an adjuvant treatment for chronic cor pulmonale heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Published in
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12906-015-0939-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liwei Shi, Yanming Xie, Xing Liao, Yan Chai, Yanhua Luo

Abstract

Shenmai injection (SM), as a traditional Chinese medicine injection, is widely used for chronic cor pulmonale heart failure in mainland China. It is essential to systematically assess the efficacy and safety of SM as an adjuvant treatment for chronic cor pulmonale heart failure. Eight English and Chinese electronic databases were searched, from inception to December 2014, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of SM for chronic cor pulmonale heart failure. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to evaluate the methodological quality of eligible studies. Meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager 5.2. Twenty-seven RCTs with 2045 participants were identified. The methodological quality of the included studies was generally low. Only one trial reported data on death. None of the included trials reported quality of life. The meta-analysis indicated that compared to conventional treatment, the combination of SM and conventional treatment was more effective in terms of the New York Heart Association classification (RR, 1.26; 95 % CI, 1.20-1.32; P < 0.00001), Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (MD, 11.33; 95 % CI, 8.59-14.07; p < 0.00001), partial pressure of oxygen (MD, 1.00; 95 % CI, 0.64-1.36; P < 0.00001) and partial pressure of carbon dioxide (MD, 0.83; 95 % CI, 0.58-1.08; p < 0.00001). In addition, two trials reported that SM plus conventional treatment was superior to the conventional treatment alone to reduce B-type natriuretic peptide. No serious adverse drug events or reactions were reported. SM plus conventional treatment appeared to be effective and relatively safe for chronic cor pulmonale heart failure. However, due to the generally low methodological quality and small sample size, this review didn't find evidence to support routine use of SM as an adjuvant treatment for chronic cor pulmonale heart failure.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 17%
Researcher 2 11%
Other 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 6 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Psychology 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 7 39%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 March 2020.
All research outputs
#5,152,757
of 17,136,794 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#891
of 2,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,819
of 372,257 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#97
of 342 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,136,794 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,970 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. 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 372,257 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 342 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 70% of its contemporaries.