Efficacy and safety of Si-Jun-Zi-Tang-based therapies for functional (non-ulcer) dyspepsia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Table 2 Characteristics of included randomized controlled trials

Author (Ref.)	Diagnostic criteria	Sample size		Age range, mean (years)		Sex (Male/female)
Author (Ref.)	Diagnostic criteria	Trial group	Control group	Trial group	Control group	Trial group	Control group
Hu (2001) [32]	Clinical diagnosis and negative investigations	49	36	18–70, 43.5	19.5–69, 42.5	19/30	14/22
Cao (2008) [33]	Clinical diagnosis	49	36	18–70, 43.5	19–69, 42.5	19/30	14/22
Li (2008) [34]	Rome II criteria, TCM diagnostic criteria and negative investigations	45	45	23–68, 39.7	21–65, 43.4	12/33	15/30
Deng and Su (2010)^a [31]	Rome III criteria	142	142	19–73, 45.8	19–69, 44.9	50/92	53/89
Deng and Su (2010)^b [31]	Rome III criteria	140	142	18–75, 46.7	19–69, 44.9	51/89	53/89
Mu, (2012) [35]	Rome III criteria and negative investigations	63	62	18–60, 34.0	18–60, 35.0	28/35	29/33
Zhang, (2013) [36]	Rome III criteria and negative investigations	60	60	NM, 51.5	NM, 52.8	32/28	35/25
Lv, (2014) [37]	Rome III criteria, TCM diagnostic criteria and negative investigations	41	20	20–68, 47.2	20–68, 45.5	17/24	9/11
Zhang, (2014) [38]	Rome III criteria, TCM diagnostic criteria and negative investigations	29	28	29–63, 50.1	25–64, 47.4	14/15	14/14
Lan and Yuan, (2016) [39]	Clinical diagnosis	33	33	22–69, 50.5	21–69, 49.2	18/15	17/16
Liu et al., (2016) [40]	Rome III criteria, TCM diagnostic criteria and negative investigations	30	30	NM, 45.8	NM, 44.2	13/17	14/16
Li, (2016) [41]	Rome III criteria	34	34	18–59, 37.2	22–58, 37.6	15/19	16/18

ISSN: 2662-7671