| Studies | Treatments | Outcomes | Limitations | Inconsistency | Indirectness | Imprecision | Publication bias | Relative effect (95% CI) | Quality |
| Guo et al. [19] | AT versus CM | Weekly defecation | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | SMD, −0.29 (−0.49, −0.08) | M | IBS symptom scores | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | SMD, −1.17 (−1.42, −0.93) | M | IBS-QOL | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | SMD 2.37 (1.94, 2.80) | L | IBS-SSS | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | SMD −0.75 (−1.04, −0.47) | M | Effective rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | RR 1.25 (1.18, 1.32) | M | Recurrence rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | RR 0.43 (0.28, 0.66) | L | Adverse effects | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | RR 0.59 (0.12, 2.90) | L | Zheng et al. [20] | AT versus Sham AT | Effective rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | RR 1.22 (1.01, 1.47) | M | IBS-QOL | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | SMD −0.10 (−0.31, 0.11) | M | AT versus CM | Effective rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | RR 1.17 (1.12, 1.23) | M | IBS symptom scores | −1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | SMD −1.16 (−1.61, −0.71) | L | IBS-QOL | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | SMD 0.75 (0.34, 1.16) | L | Yan et al. [21] | AT + CHM versus CM | Effective rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | RR 1.29 (1.24, 1.35) | M | Abdominal pain | −1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | SMD −0.45 (−0.72, −0.17) | L | Chao and Zhang [22] | AT versus CM | Effective rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | RR 1.75 (1.24, 2.46) | M | Manheimer et al. [23] | AT versus Sham AT | IBS-SSS | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | SMD −0.11 (−0.35, 0.13) | L | IBS-QOL | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | SMD −0.03 (−0.27, 0.22) | L | AT versus CM | Effective rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | RR 1.28 (1.12, 1.45) | M | Fu and Jiang [24] | AT versus CM | Effective rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | RR 1.20 (1.15, 1.25) | M | Deng et al. [25] | AT versus CM | Effective rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | OR 3.92 (2.83, 5.43) | M | Recurrence rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | OR 0.22 (0.12, 0.41) | L | Li et al. [26] | AT versus CM | Recurrence rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | −1 | RR 0.49 (0.35, 0.68) | CL | Effective rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | RR 1.17 (1.08, 1.26) | L | Pei et al. [27] | AT versus CM | Effective rate | −1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | RR 1.27 (1.09, 1.49) | L | Zhao [28] | AT versus CM | Effective rate | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | RR 1.28 (1.20, 1.38) | L |
|
|