Phytotherapy versus hormonal therapy for postmenopausal bone loss: a meta-analysis

Min Xu, Qi Chen, Bin Deng, Ping Deng, Chuan-wei Mo
In: Osteoporosis International · 2008 · vol. 20(4) , pp. 519–526 · doi:10.1007/s00198-008-0724-x · PMID:18797814 · W2137752149
review OA: closed CC0
Limited metadata. Only one source feed has indexed this record so far — no abstract, full text, or open-access copy is available through Endo Lab. The publisher's page (linked below) is the canonical location for the actual content. If you have institutional access, use "Find at my library".
View at publisher → View on OpenAlex View on PubMed
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06+body, 2026-06-08 ⓘ

This meta-analysis found phytotherapy and hormonal therapy equally effective for bone mineral density, but phytotherapy had significantly fewer adverse events like uterine bleeding and breast pain.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-09 ⓘ

This meta-analysis compared phytotherapy with hormonal therapy for postmenopausal bone loss, synthesizing data from 14 randomized controlled trials (780 patients) using 43 electronic databases, with trial quality assessed by Jadad’s scale and outcomes including bone mineral density (BMD) at lumbar, femoral, and forearm sites plus adverse events. Across trials, there were no significant differences in lumbar, femoral, or forearm BMD between phytotherapy and hormonal therapy. Incidence of uterine bleeding and breast pain was significantly lower with phytotherapy than with hormonal therapy, and the authors identified the six most commonly used herbs across included studies. A major caveat highlighted by the authors is that only four trials were graded as high quality (Jadad score 3–5), and they call for further high-quality trials, while the paper does not report strong evidence of added BMD efficacy beyond hormones. This paper does not explicitly discuss endometriosis or adenomyosis; it was included in the corpus via a keyword match in the upstream search index.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

References (26)

SciLite annotations

chemicals 1
mineral

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
scilite
last seen: 2026-05-18T04:25:29.313245+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK