L
Li Gao
Researcher at Beijing University of Chinese Medicine
Publications - 9
Citations - 152
Li Gao is an academic researcher from Beijing University of Chinese Medicine. The author has contributed to research in topics: Randomized controlled trial & Massage. The author has an hindex of 5, co-authored 9 publications receiving 62 citations.
Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Prevalence of depression among Chinese university students: a systematic review and meta-analysis
TL;DR: The overall prevalence of depression among Chinese university students was shown to be 28.4% (n = 185,787), with 95%CI from 25.7 to 31.2%.
Journal ArticleDOI
Wenjing Decoction (Herbal Medicine) for the Treatment of Primary Dysmenorrhea: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
TL;DR: The quality of the evidence for this finding was low due to a high risk of bias in the included studies, and well-designed randomized controlled trials are still needed to further evaluate the efficacy of Wenjing decoction for the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea.
Journal ArticleDOI
Effect of Buyang Huanwu decoction for the rehabilitation of ischemic stroke patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
TL;DR: Wang et al. as discussed by the authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of buyang huanwu decoction (BHD) for the rehabilitation of ischemic stroke patients.
Journal ArticleDOI
Pediatric massage for the treatment of anorexia in children: A meta-analysis
TL;DR: Massage therapy was significantly better than pharmacotherapy in treating anorexia in children, however, the quality of evidence for this finding was low due to high risk of bias of the included studies.
Journal ArticleDOI
Paediatric massage for treatment of acute diarrhoea in children: a meta-analysis
Li Gao,Chunhua Jia,Hui-Wen Huang +2 more
TL;DR: Paediatric massage was significantly better than pharmacotherapy in treating acute diarrhoea in children in terms of clinical effective rate, but the quality of evidence for this finding was low due to high risk of bias of the included studies.