Table 3.
SMD | LL | HL | Degrees of freedom | Heterogeneity | Effect size | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
I2 | Z | P | ||||||
Species | SR | −3.33 | −5.18 | −1.47 | 5 | 92.10% | 3.52 | P < 0.00001 |
WR | −2.85 | −3.79 | −1.91 | 5 | 73.50% | 5.93 | P = 0.002 | |
Modeling | 2-VO | −2.97 | −4.21 | − 1.73 | 6 | 85.80% | 4.69 | P < 0.00001 |
4-VO | −3.36 | −8.63 | 1.92 | 1 | 94.30% | 1.25 | P = 0.212 | |
EO | −2.38 | −3.82 | −0.95 | 1 | 65.80% | 3.26 | P = 0.001 | |
MCAO | −5.19 | −6.58 | −3.79 | 0 | – | 7.29 | P < 0.00001 | |
Methods | EA | −3.05 | −4.56 | −1.53 | 6 | 90.50% | 3.94 | P < 0.00001 |
MA | −3.11 | −4.23 | −2.00 | 4 | 75.90% | 5.47 | P = 0.002 | |
OVERALL | −3.06 | −4.04 | −2.09 | 11 | 87.10% | 6.04 | P < 0.00001 |
SR Sprague–Dawley Rats, WR Wister Rats, 2-VO bilateral common carotid artery occlusion, VO 4-vessel occlusion, EO embolic occlusion, MCAO middle cerebral artery occlusion, EA Electroacupuncture, MA Manual acupuncture