Visual abstract

Introduction

Coughing is a physiological reflex that protects the lower airways, but it is also one of the most common reasons for healthcare visits, and when persistent or excessive, it requires appropriate evaluation, treatment, and management [1]. By duration, coughing is categorized as acute (< 3 weeks), subacute (3–8 weeks), or chronic (> 8 weeks). An acute cough most often follows viral infection and usually resolves without intervention [2]. In contrast, a chronic cough, estimated to affect about 11%-13% of the general population, reduces quality of life and productivity, and increases cough-related healthcare costs [3,4]. The subacute cough was long regarded as predominantly postinfectious and self-limited, but recent reports show higher proportions of cough-variant asthma or atopic cough. The subacute cough may also represent a preliminary stage that progresses to a chronic cough, which supports the need for timely, appropriate care [5,6].

Management should first target the underlying cause, with cough-variant asthma, nonasthmatic eosinophilic bronchitis, upper airway cough syndrome, and gastroesophageal reflux being the most common etiologies of chronic cough [7]. However, it is still unclear which risk factors in patients with an acute or subacute cough are associated with progression to refractory or unexplained chronic cough. Thus it remains a major challenge, as some patients fail to respond to guideline-directed therapy even when an etiology is identified, making adjunctive options necessary [8–10].

Maimendong-Tang (MMDT; Maimendong Decoction) is an East Asian traditional medicine (EATM) formula used for cough that consists of Liriopis Tuber, Pinelliae Tuber, Oryzae Semen, Zizyphi Fructus, Ginseng Radix, and Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma. In a meta-analysis, Kim et al [11] reported that across various conditions, MMDT reduced cough severity more than conventional antitussives in patients with persistent cough despite standard treatment. Antitussive mechanisms of MMDT have been proposed to include modulation of vagal pathways and suppression of airway eosinophilic infiltration and remodeling, thereby reducing airway hyperresponsiveness [12,13]. However, most prior studies have been conducted in controlled clinical trial settings, and real-world data remain scarce, particularly regarding the prescribing patterns and treatment responses to MMDT in patients with multimorbidity who commonly present in primary care environments.

A retrospective chart review was conducted in a single primary Korean medicine clinic in this study to characterize clinical features, prescribing patterns, treatment responses in patients with subacute and chronic cough.

Materials and Methods

1. Study design

A retrospective chart review was performed using the medical records of Incheon Kyungheebubu Korean Medicine Clinic (Incheon, Republic of Korea). Adults (≥ 19 years) were included who presented initially for cough treatment between January 1, 2020 and May 31, 2025, were classified as having subacute cough (≥ 3 and < 8 weeks since onset) or chronic cough (≥ 8 weeks since onset), and received MMDT for at least 2 weeks. To reflect patient-tailored prescribing in Korean medicine clinics, we defined “modified MMDT” as any prescription containing at least 5 of the 6 original herbs; modified MMDT was treated as MMDT for eligibility and analysis. We excluded patients with an acute cough (< 3 weeks since onset), those who did not receive MMDT, and those without a baseline numeric rating scale (NRS) score for the severity of coughing. Because the study focused on prescribing patterns and treatment response to MMDT, restrictions were not imposed based on the presumed underlying etiology. Moreover, since patients with subacute or chronic cough who visit Korean medicine clinics have often already undergone diagnostic testing in conventional medical settings and frequently present without a clear single etiology, presumptive etiologies based on medical history and physical examination were used rather than requiring confirmatory testing for all patients.

2. Variables

The primary outcome was based on the NRS score for severity of cough and the secondary outcome was based on the NRS score for severity of sputum. Age, sex, body mass index, cough duration, medical history, the constituent herbs of MMDT, dosage, duration, and the presence or absence of concomitant symptoms that could plausibly influence herb selection (indigestion, sleep disturbance, postnasal drip, fatigue, sputum, globus sensation, and dry mouth coded as present/absent) were extracted from medical records for each patient.

3. Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed primarily in a descriptive manner using Python (Version 3.10). Categorical variables were summarized as number (%) and continuous variables as mean ± SD or median with interquartile range (IQR), as appropriate. NRS scores for severity of cough and sputum were tabulated and presented in a graph to show trajectories, stratified by subacute and chronic cough. The cumulative proportions of patients who achieved: (1) ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in NRS score for severity of cough, and (2) ≥ 3-point absolute decrease from baseline were also plotted, again stratified by subacute and chronic cough. The thresholds were set with reference to findings from the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of 17 mm for acute cough and 30 mm for chronic cough, as the minimal clinically important difference for NRS score in severity of cough has not been established [14].

To explore herb modification patterns and their relationship to symptoms, cluster and network analyses in Python (Version 3.10) were conducted. For each patient, the MMDT constituent herb set and computed pairwise prescription similarity were represented using the Jaccard similarity index, which is defined as the size of the intersection divided by the size of the union of 2 sets [15]. For example, the Jaccard index equals 1 when 2 patients share an identical prescription composition, whereas it equals 0 when 2 patients have completely different prescriptions with no herbs in common. Similarities were converted to distances and applied to k-means clustering (unsupervised) [16]. The number of clusters was selected based on the silhouette score and the within-cluster sum of squared Euclidean distances to centroids [17]. A higher silhouette score indicates that patients within the same cluster are more similar to each other than to those in other clusters. A lower within-cluster sum of squared distances suggests that prescriptions within a cluster are tightly grouped around their centroid. Thirty random initializations of k-means were run, and the solution with the fewest misclassification errors, defined as assigning patients to the same cluster despite sharing no herbs other than those common to all clusters, was selected. A herb network (reflecting both individual herb frequency and co-use) and a herb-symptom bipartite network linking patient symptoms to herbs used were visualized to analyze prescription patterns [18].

4. Ethics approval

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Wonkwang University (IRB no.: WKIRB-202508-BM-068). As this was a retrospective chart review using existing medical records, the requirement for informed consent was waived by the IRB.

Results

1. Patient selection and characteristics

Between January 1, 2020 and May 31, 2025, 61 adult patients received at least 2 weeks of herbal therapy for cough, of whom 35 were prescribed MMDT. After excluding 4 patients with acute cough, 31 patients with subacute or chronic cough were included in the analysis (Figure 1). The list of prescribed herbs, the number of patients who received each herb, and daily doses are presented in Table S1. Patients were found to have received MMDT prepared as follows: herbs for a 30-day supply were rinsed in cold water and soaked in approximately 11,000 cc of water for about 1 hour before heating. The mixture was then brought to a boil over 50 minutes and decocted for an additional 2 hours. For all patients, MMDT was prescribed in units of 60 packs (30-day supply; 100 cc per pack, 2 packs daily divided into morning and evening doses to be taken following meals), with 1–5 units dispensed. Nineteen patients (61.3%) received a 1-month supply and 8 (25.8%) received a 2-month supply; 2 patients (6.5%) each received 3-month and 4-month supplies (Figure S1). At baseline, the mean age was 53.6 ± 14.8 years; approximately 90% were women. More than 90% had never smoked, and most reported alcohol consumption < once per week. Fourteen patients (45.2%) had subacute cough and 17 (54.8%) had chronic cough. The baseline NRS score for severity of cough was 8.0 ± 1.0 (median 8, IQR 7–9). The baseline NRS score for severity of sputum was 3.2 ± 2.5 (median 3, IQR 1–5), with a broader distribution than the cough scores (Figure S2). Based on medical history and examination, presumptive etiologies included post-infectious cough in 13 patients (41.9%) among those with subacute cough, and airway hyperresponsiveness in 8 (25.8%) among those with chronic cough; asthma in 4 (12.9%) and postnasal drip in 2 (6.5%) followed (Table 1). Three patients were lost to follow-up after the 1^st visit, and 1 after the 4^th visit; all others completed follow-up until the planned end of treatment. Median (IQR) intervals between visits were 35.5 (32.0–49.5) days for Visit 1 to Visit 2 (n = 28), 34.5 (33.2–43.5) days for Visit 2 to Visit 3 (n = 12), and 34.0 (34.0–42.0) days for Visit 3 to Visit 4 (n = 5).

2. Changes in NRS scores for severity of cough and sputum following MMDT administration

During the first month of MMDT treatment, the mean NRS score for severity of cough decreased from 7.95 ± 1.04 at Visit 1 (n = 31) to 3.14 ± 1.87 at Visit 2 (n = 28), representing the largest interval change. From the second month onward, subsequent decreases were attenuated among those who received additional prescriptions. In the subacute group, the mean NRS score decreased from 8.21 ± 0.97 (n = 14) to 2.58 ± 1.46 (n = 13) between Visits 1 and 2; in the chronic group, the reduction was from 7.74 ± 1.06 (n = 17) to 3.63 ± 2.09 (n = 15). The mean NRS score for severity of sputum decreased from 3.18 ± 2.51 (n = 31) at Visit 1 to 1.68 ± 1.72 (n = 28) at Visit 2, with smaller gains afterward (Figure 2, Table 2). The cumulative proportion achieving ≥ 50% reduction in NRS score for cough severity reached 67.7% at Visit 2 (85.7% subacute; 52.9% chronic), with limited additional increases thereafter (Figure 3). The cumulative proportion achieving a ≥ 3-point decrease in NRS score at Visit 2 was 74.2% overall (92.9% subacute; 58.8% chronic) (Figure S3). No adverse events were identified during treatment.

3. Clustering and network analysis of prescription patterns

All patients received modified MMDT, and each patient’s initial herb combination at Visit 1 remained unchanged through the last visit. When we examined the change in the within-cluster sum of squared errors, the largest drop occurred up to 4 clusters; and the silhouette score at k = 4 was approximately 0.98, a relatively high value that further supported the choice of 4 clusters (Table S2, Figure S4). Across all clusters, Liriopis Tuber, Pinelliae Tuber, Oryzae Semen, Ginseng Radix, and Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizoma were typically used. In k-means clustering results based on prescription similarity, 18 patients populated a cluster characterized by frequent use of Ephedrae Herba and Longan Arillus in addition to core MMDT herbs, while 8 patients formed a cluster characterized by Mori Radicis Cortex and Fritillariae Thunbergii Bulbus (Table 3, Figures S5–S6). In the herb-symptom bipartite network, sputum, sleep disturbance, and indigestion were relatively common symptoms, but no striking pattern of herb selection by symptom profile was observed; analyses stratified by subacute and chronic cough yielded patterns similar to those observed in the overall herb-symptom network (Figure S7).

Discussion

In this single-EATM clinic retrospective review study of 31 patients with subacute or chronic cough treated with MMDT, reductions were observed in NRS scores for severity of cough and sputum. Three patients were lost to follow-up after the 1^st prescription (Visit 1) and 1 after the 4^th prescription (approximately 4 months later). The greatest improvements in both NRS score for severity of cough and sputum were observed within the 1^st month, and patients with subacute cough (most with post-infectious cough) showed faster and greater improvements than those with chronic cough. All patients received individually modified MMDT, with adjustments in constituent herbs and dosage tailored to each case. Four patient-prescription clusters were identified based on herb combinations, but no meaningful differences in herb choice were detected by symptom profile or by subacute or chronic status. No adverse events were observed.

A meta-analysis of 4 randomized controlled trials including 2,279 patients found that MMDT reduced cough severity more than conventional medicine alone; Kim et al [11] reported a 74% relative improvement. The effects varied by condition e.g., in the post-infectious cough group (the largest subgroup) MMDT outperformed the control group early in the trials but the between-group difference was not significant at Week 1. The effects were inconsistent in cough related to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, postoperative states after lung cancer surgery, or asthma. A cohort of this study also included a high proportion of post-infectious cough, and higher rates of improvement (≥ 50%) within 1 month were observed among subacute cough patients than among chronic cough patients, suggesting that MMDT’s effect may differ by underlying etiology [11]. Larger clinical studies that stratify by disease are needed, and are underway [19,20]. In a study by Kwon et al [21] which analyzed patients registered at a single medical institution in Korea it was concluded that post-infectious cough dominates subacute cough. In a prospective study by Ishiura et al [6], which enrolled patients with subacute cough who visited 11 respiratory clinics or 20 hospitals affiliated with the Japan Cough Society, higher proportions of cough-variant asthma, atopic cough, and unexplained cough within subacute presentations were reported. A substantial fraction of subacute cough presentations progress to chronic cough [5], implying that certain subgroups of subacute cough should be regarded as preliminary forms of chronic cough. In this context, future evaluations of MMDT should set appropriate treatment and follow-up durations by etiology, addressing key questions such as whether early MMDT use in selected subacute subgroups can prevent chronic cough by reducing airway hypersensitivity, and whether specific subgroups derive greater benefit.

Considering the feasibility of prospective, long-term real-world studies on chronic cough at primary EATM clinics, a Korean survey (2016–2018) found that 70.3% of 408 patients with chronic cough reported limited effects of conventional pharmaceutical treatment [22], and a prospective cohort of referred patients in Poland (2018–2022) showed a 27.1%-30.7% prevalence of refractory chronic cough [23], indicating that many patients remain symptomatic despite standard care. In addition, as patients often approach EATM to overcome these treatment limitations, and considering that most users access EATM as outpatients [24], primary clinic-based, prospective, long-term observational studies are essential to establish evidence for cough management with MMDT and related EATM therapies [25]. For such real-world studies, enhancing feasibility and ensuring research quality will require attention to a variety of factors. The participants in the current study included diverse etiologies, reflecting not only disease-targeted but also syndrome-targeted decision-making in Korean medicine. Subacute cough patients exhibited faster and more frequent improvements than chronic patients, possibly reflecting etiological differences in responsiveness to MMDT. In light of this, future studies should adopt standardized, clinically meaningful syndrome assessment criteria for eligibility and treatment protocols that can be implemented in routine practice. Regarding outcome measures, the NRS was used in this study. While the VAS shows moderate test-retest reliability for chronic cough, its correlation with cough frequency varies; expert groups recommend standardized, consensus-based use of the VAS or the NRS for cough severity [14]. Outcome measures that capture impact on daily life while remaining practical for clinics should be considered for use in research, and this balance can increase study feasibility. With respect to assessment intervals in studies using MMDT treatment for cough, the largest decreases in cough and sputum severity using the NRS were observed within the 1^st month, and future studies may consider 1–2 week assessment intervals to better capture early changes. This study included patients who visited the EATM clinic for herbal treatment of subacute or chronic cough and inclusion was not restricted by the underlying etiology, and incorporated presumptive diagnoses. Most patients had already undergone diagnostic testing and standard treatments in conventional care, but remained symptomatic, especially those with chronic cough. Therefore, repeating all tests is often impractical even when prior testing was recent. Practice-based EATM research therefore needs realistic, standardized diagnostic protocols that ensure adequate diagnostic accuracy while reflecting clinical realities.

This observational study used real-world data from medical records at a primary EATM clinic to describe demographics, clinical features, and treatment patterns in subacute and chronic cough. Changes in cough and sputum severity were quantified using the NRS in both subgroups and basic safety was observed. How MMDT was modified in practice and used was also analyzed, and cluster and network analyses were performed to objectify patterns, which may support future standardization. These findings provide foundational data for multi-center EATM studies on subacute or chronic cough.

The study has several limitations. Firstly, as a single-clinic observational study, the sample was restricted to patients who visited 1 medical institution, follow-up was not uniform across patients, the sample size was small, and no control groups were included. These factors increase the risk of bias. Selection bias limits generalizability therefore, the results of this study should be interpreted as treatment response and clinical course rather than causal effect. We therefore presented analyses descriptively to maximize informational value. Secondly, because this was a retrospective study in a primary care environment, diagnostic accuracy may be suboptimal; we relied on presumptive diagnoses, and data completeness and consistency may be limited. Although primary-clinic research is essential to reflect EATM practice in Korea, methodological solutions remain underdeveloped; we report these challenges as they are to inform future multi-center studies. Thirdly, we used patient-reported NRS scores for cough and sputum severity and did not include validated instruments for cough impact [26]. This reflects the reality of clinical practice where time and resources are limited, and therefore practical and scientifically robust tools are needed that can capture the clinical value of EATM whilst allowing efficient and feasible assessment in real-world settings. Fourthly, follow-up ranged from 1 to 4 months, which was longer than in some prior MMDT trials for cough but still short for refractory or chronic cough. Future explanatory randomized trials, pragmatic trials, or registry-based studies with longer follow-up are warranted [27]. Finally, the clustering and network analyses were exploratory, and their stability and clinical interpretability are constrained by the small sample size. These analyses were conducted to quantitatively summarize how herbal prescriptions are tailored to individual patients, rather than to provide clinically meaningful conclusions. Nonetheless, such methods may be valuable in future multi-center studies, where they can help summarize complex prescription patterns in a systematic manner.

Conclusion

In patients with subacute and chronic cough treated with MMDT at a primary EATM clinic, the greatest improvement in NRS scores, without notable adverse events, was observed within the first month. Although the retrospective design, small sample, and limited data collection restrict generalizability, this descriptive analysis of demographics, clinical features, and treatment patterns provides preliminary evidence and practical parameters for planning large, prospective studies of MMDT treatment for cough.

Supplementary Materials

Article information

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, visualization, writing – original draft preparation: DP. Investigation, writing – review and editing: JH. Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, methodology, project administration, supervision, writing – original draft preparation: JL. Writing – original draft preparation: JU. Writing – review and editing: KK. Data curation, resources, writing – review and editing: SH.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Author Use of AI Tools Statement

Generative AI was used for coding support in data analysis and for translation after manuscript preparation. The authors verify and take full responsibility for the use of generative AI in the preparation of this manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT; no.: RS-2023-00261934), the Korea Health Technology Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute, funded by the Ministry of Health and Welfare (no.: RS-2025-02221762), and Basic Science Research Program through the NRF funded by the Ministry of Education (no.: RS-2025-25411622).

Ethical Statement

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Wonkwang University (no.: WKIRB-202508-BM-068). As this was a retrospective chart review using existing medical records, the requirement for informed consent was waived by the IRB.

Data Availability

The data are available from the corresponding author on request. They are not publicly available because they contain information that could compromise patient privacy.

Figure 1

Flow chart of patient selection.

Figure 2

Change of numeric rating scale scores for cough and sputum severity

(A) Changes in NRS for cough: Subacute cough group; (B) Changes in NRS for cough: Chronic cough group;

(C) Changes in NRS for sputum: Subacute cough group; (D) Changes in NRS for sputum: Chronic cough group

NB. All patients were prescribed water-decocted MMDT at a dosage of 60 packs per month, with approximately 1-month intervals between visits.

Figure 3

Cumulative rate of patients who showed ≥ 50% improvement in NRS score for severity of cough from baseline (Visit 1).

References

• [1] An J, Lee JH, Won HK, Kang Y, Kwon HS, Lee JS, et al. Cough presentation and cough-related healthcare utilization in tertiary care: analysis of routinely collected academic institutional database. Lung 2022;200(4):431−9.ArticlePubMedPDF
• [2] Irwin RS, French CL, Chang AB, Altman KW, Adams TM, Altman KW, et al. Classification of cough as a symptom in adults and management algorithms: chest guideline and expert panel report. Chest 2018;153(1):196−209.PubMed
• [3] Chamberlain SAF, Garrod R, Douiri A, Masefield S, Powell P, Bücher C, et al. The impact of chronic cough: a cross-sectional European survey. Lung 2015;193(3):401−8.ArticlePubMedPDF
• [4] Lee JH, Kang SY, Yoo Y, An J, Park SY, Lee JH, et al. Epidemiology of adult chronic cough: disease burden, regional issues, and recent findings. Asia Pac Allergy 2021;11(4):e38. ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
• [5] Lätti AM, Pekkanen J, Koskela HO. Predictors of prolongation in recent-onset cough. ERJ Open Res 2019;5(2):00238−2018.ArticlePubMedPMC
• [6] Ishiura Y, Fujimura M, Ogawa H, Hara J, Shintani H, Hozawa S, et al. Prevalence and causes of subacute cough in Japan. Respir Investig 2025;63(1):74−80.ArticlePubMed
• [7] Sonoda K, Nayak R. Chronic cough: evaluation and management. Am Fam Physician 2024;110(2):167−73.PubMed
• [8] Zhan W, Wu F, Zhang Y, Lin L, Li W, Luo W, et al. Identification of cough-variant asthma phenotypes based on clinical and pathophysiologic data. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2023;152(3):622−32.ArticlePubMed
• [9] Ribolsi M, Savarino E, De Bortoli N, Balestrieri P, Furnari M, Martinucci I, et al. Reflux pattern and role of impedance-pH variables in predicting PPI response in patients with suspected GERD-related chronic cough. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2014;40(8):966−73.ArticlePubMed
• [10] Irwin RS, Madison JM. Unexplained or refractory chronic cough in adults. N Engl J Med 2025;392(12):1203−14.ArticlePubMed
• [11] Kim KI, Shin S, Lee N, Lee BJ, Lee J, Lee H. a traditional herbal medication, Maekmoondong-tang, for cough: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Ethnopharmacol 2016;178:144−54.ArticlePubMed
• [12] Aizawa H, Yoshida M, Inoue H, Hara N. Traditional oriental herbal medicine, Bakumondo-to, suppresses vagal neuro-effector transmission in guinea pig trachea. J Asthma Off J Assoc Care Asthma 2003;40(5):497−503.ArticlePubMed
• [13] Park S, Sohn SH, Jung KH, Lee KY, Yeom YR, Kim GE, et al. The effects of maekmoondong-tang on cockroach extract-induced allergic asthma. Evid Based Complement Altern Med 2014;2014:958965. ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
• [14] Zhang M, Sykes DL, Brindle K, Sadofsky LR, Morice AH. Chronic cough—the limitation and advances in assessment techniques. J Thorac Dis 2022;14(12):5097−119.ArticlePubMedPMC
• [15] Jaccard P. Étude comparative de la distribution florale dans une portion des Alpes et du Jura. Bull Soc Vaudoise Sci Nat 1901;37:547−79. [in French] https://www.e-periodica.ch/digbib/view?pid=bsv-002%3A1901%3A37%3A%3A579
• [16] Rodriguez MZ, Comin CH, Casanova D, Bruno OM, Amancio DR, Costa L, da F, et al. Clustering algorithms: a comparative approach. PLoS One 2019;14(1):e0210236. ArticlePubMedPMC
• [17] Shi C, Wei B, Wei S, Wang W, Liu H, Liu J. A quantitative discriminant method of elbow point for the optimal number of clusters in clustering algorithm. EURASIP J Wirel Commun Netw 2021;2021(1):31. ArticlePDF
• [18] Shen B, Coruzzi GM, Shasha D. Bipartite networks represent causality better than simple networks: evidence, algorithms, and applications. Front Genet 2024;15:1371607. ArticlePubMedPMC
• [19] Lee B, Park HJ, Jung SY, Kwon OJ, Park YC, Yang C. Herbal medicine maekmundong-tang on patients with nonspecific chronic cough: study protocol for a double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2023;20(5):4164. ArticlePubMedPMC
• [20] Cheon C, Kang S, Ko Y, Kim M, Jang BH, Shin YC, et al. Maekmoondong-tang in treatment of postoperative cough in patients with lung cancer: study protocol for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial. Medicine (Baltimore) 2018;97(29):e11541. ArticlePubMedPMC
• [21] Kwon NH, Oh MJ, Min TH, Lee BJ, Choi DC. Causes and clinical features of subacute cough. Chest 2006;129(5):1142−7.ArticlePubMed
• [22] Kang SY, Won HK, Lee SM, Kwon JW, Kim MH, Jo EJ, et al. Impact of cough and unmet needs in chronic cough: a survey of patients in Korea. Lung 2019;197(5):635−9.ArticlePubMedPDF
• [23] Kukiełka P, Moliszewska K, Białek-Gosk K, Grabczak EM, Dąbrowska M. Prevalence of refractory and unexplained chronic cough in adults treated in cough centre. ERJ Open Res 2024;10(5):00254−2024.ArticlePubMedPMC
• [24] Healthcare Bigdata Open System [Internet]. Health insurance review & assessment service (HIRA): [cited 2025 Jul 31]. Available from: https://opendata.hira.or.kr/op/opc/olap3thDsInfoTab4.do#none
• [25] Kim SD, Choi S, Kim S. Comprehensive review of Korean medicine registries 2015–2023. Front Med 2024;11:1412053. ArticlePubMedPMC
• [26] Gu D, Song E, Kim KI, Jun H, Uhm J, Hong S, et al. Suggestions for reporting items in case reports on traditional Korean medicine treatments for coughs: a literature review of case studies. J Korean Orient Intern Med 2024;45(6):1226−52. [in Korean]ArticlePDF
• [27] Zhang J, Zhang B, Fauci AJ, Lee MS, Wieland LS, Majd I, et al. The Rome consensus: good clinical trials for traditional medicine. Integr Med Res 2025;14(3):101211. ArticlePubMedPMC

Figure & Data

References

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by