Evidence Hub

Pediatric efficacy and safety in common cold treated with herbal medicine (PEACH): a systematic review and meta-analysis

Kim SD, Lee SW, Woo SC, Kim DH, Jun LK, Kim JH, Yang DY, Kang BG et al.

Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025

7,176 participants

Abstract

Introduction: The common cold is one of the most frequent illnesses in children, yet effective and safe treatments remain limited. Concerns regarding the safety of conventional medications persist. Herbal medicine (HM) has long been used, but the quantity and certainty of evidence in children have not been systematically summarized.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO CRD42024610421). Nine databases were searched to October 2024. Eligible studies included pediatric patients (<19 years) treated with oral HM compared with conventional medicine, placebo, or no treatment. Risk of bias was assessed with RoB 2, and certainty of evidence was rated using GRADE.

Results: Sixty-six RCTs involving 7,176 participants were included. HM significantly improved total effective rate compared with conventional medicine (RR = 1.16, 95% CI [1.12-1.21]), with combination therapy providing additional benefits (RR = 1.17, 95% CI [1.13-1.22]). HM shortened overall symptom improvement time (SMD = -1.01, 95% CI [-1.41, -0.60]) and reduced total symptom severity (SMD = -0.80, 95% CI [-1.22, -0.38]) compared with conventional medicine. Both HM monotherapy and combination therapy demonstrated a markedly lower incidence of adverse events compared with conventional medicine (RR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.20, 0.40] and RR = 0.53, 95% CI [0.32, 0.88], respectively), with reported events being mild and mainly…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 7,176 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free