| Course | INHE 3003 Research Literacy for Integrative Health Professionals |
|---|---|
| Week | Week 9 |
| Paper type | Evidence table |
| Length | About 560 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Walden University |
| Program | BS in Integrative Health |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for INHE 3003 Week 9
Three Turmeric Trials in Identical Fields: An Evidence Table Built So That Differences in the Rows Are Differences Between the Studies
Student Name
Walden University
INHE 3003: Research Literacy for Integrative Health Professionals
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Three Turmeric Trials in Identical Fields: An Evidence Table Built So That Differences in the Rows Are Differences Between the Studies
How the Table Was Built
Three randomized trials of turmeric preparations for knee osteoarthritis were extracted into the same nine fields. Each field was filled from the same part of each record: the published abstract for all three, and, for the Tasmanian trial, its registry entry where the abstract was silent, marked as such. When an abstract did not report a field, the cell says "not stated in abstract" rather than leaving a blank or filling it from memory. The aim is that any difference visible between rows reflects a difference between the studies, not between the ways they were read.
The Table
Table 1
Three randomized trials of turmeric preparations in knee osteoarthritis
| Field | Wang et al. (2020) | Kuptniratsaikul et al. (2014) | Panahi et al. (2014) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Setting | Single center, Tasmania, Australia | Multicenter, Thailand | Single center, Iran | |
| Participants randomized | 70 | 367 | 40 | |
| Population | Over 40, knee pain over 40 mm, effusion-synovitis on ultrasound | Primary knee osteoarthritis, pain score 5 or higher | Mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis | |
| Preparation and daily dose | Curcuma longa extract, 1,000 mg (registry) | Curcuma domestica extracts, 1,500 mg | Curcuminoids, 1,500 mg in three doses | |
| Comparator | Placebo | Ibuprofen 1,200 mg | Placebo | |
| Duration | 12 weeks | 4 weeks | 6 weeks | |
| Main pain outcome | Visual analog scale | WOMAC pain and total | WOMAC, visual analog scale | |
| Main pain result | 9.1 mm greater reduction than placebo (95% CI 17.8 to 0.4) | Noninferior to ibuprofen on WOMAC total, pain and function | Greater reductions than placebo on WOMAC and visual scale | |
| Funding | University and herbal extract manufacturer | Not stated in abstract | Not stated in abstract | |
Results are as reported in each abstract; only the Tasmanian trial's abstract gave a confidence interval for its main pain result.
Reading down the columns, the three trials differ on almost every field: two used placebo and one an active drug, durations ran from four to twelve weeks, the preparations differed and the populations were defined differently. Those differences are what a reader should take from the table before any conclusion.
What the Table Shows
All three trials report less pain with a turmeric preparation, two against placebo and one equal to ibuprofen. But the table also shows why they cannot simply be added together. The placebo-controlled trials are small, 40 and 70 participants, and short. The largest trial compared turmeric with ibuprofen, so it answers a different question: whether turmeric is as good as a common pain reliever over four weeks, not whether it beats an inactive capsule. Only one abstract reports a confidence interval, so the size of the effect is visible for one trial only.
A meta-analysis of eight trials of turmeric and curcumin for arthritis found reductions in pain compared with placebo and no detectable difference compared with pain medicines, but noted that the total number of trials and their quality were limited (Daily et al., 2016). The table is consistent with that summary and shows its basis at the level of individual studies.
What the Table Cannot Show
Funding is not stated in two abstracts, so the table cannot compare sponsorship across trials. Dropout, blinding procedures and product standardization are also outside what the abstracts report. Those would be the next fields to add, from the full articles.
References
Daily, J. W., Yang, M., & Park, S. (2016). Efficacy of turmeric extracts and curcumin for alleviating the symptoms of joint arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Journal of Medicinal Food, 19(8), 717-729. https://doi.org/10.1089/jmf.2016.3705
Kuptniratsaikul, V., Dajpratham, P., Taechaarpornkul, W., Buntragulpoontawee, M., Lukkanapichonchut, P., Chootip, C., Saengsuwan, J., Tantayakom, K., & Laongpech, S. (2014). Efficacy and safety of Curcuma domestica extracts compared with ibuprofen in patients with knee osteoarthritis: A multicenter study. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 9, 451-458. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S58535
Panahi, Y., Rahimnia, A.-R., Sharafi, M., Alishiri, G., Saburi, A., & Sahebkar, A. (2014). Curcuminoid treatment for knee osteoarthritis: A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Phytotherapy Research, 28(11), 1625-1631. https://doi.org/10.1002/ptr.5174
Wang, Z., Jones, G., Winzenberg, T., Cai, G., Laslett, L. L., Aitken, D., Hopper, I., Singh, A., Jones, R., Fripp, J., Ding, C., & Antony, B. (2020). Effectiveness of Curcuma longa extract for the treatment of symptoms and effusion-synovitis of knee osteoarthritis: A randomized trial. Annals of Internal Medicine, 173(11), 861-869. https://doi.org/10.7326/M20-0990
What the INHE 3003 Week 9 instructions ask for
Evidence table assignments ask students to summarize several studies in a table using the same fields for each. Prompts usually specify the fields, such as design, sample, intervention, comparison, outcomes, results and limitations, and ask for a short narrative. Instructors look for consistent extraction: the same information taken from the same part of each study, so that differences in the table reflect real differences between studies. Tables that fill some cells from abstracts and others from memory, leave blanks without explanation, or describe results in different terms for different studies usually earn less credit. Some prompts ask for a risk-of-bias column as well.
How the INHE 3003 Week 9 example is put together
The table is preceded by a paragraph explaining the extraction rule and how missing information is marked. Nine fields cover three trials, with a note on which result was reported with an interval. A paragraph reads down the columns to name the main differences before any conclusion. A section explains what the table shows and why the trials cannot simply be combined, then connects the table to a published meta-analysis of eight trials. A final section lists what the abstracts did not report and names the fields that would be added from the full articles. Each column was filled before any comparison was written, so the narrative could not shape the extraction. The table cites each trial by author and year in its header row.
Reading the INHE 3003 Week 9 rubric
Instructors generally reward consistent extraction, and identical fields filled from equivalent sources secure the main share. Marking missing information explicitly earns credit because it prevents blanks from being read as findings. Reading differences between studies before drawing conclusions shows the table is being used, not only built. Explaining why an active-comparator trial answers a different question from placebo-controlled trials is often where the strongest tables stand out. Connecting the table to a meta-analysis shows the student can place individual studies in the wider evidence. Accurate citations for four sources, including a meta-analysis, complete the work. Filling every cell before writing any comparison is a discipline instructors look for.
INHE 3003 Week 9 help from the desk
Choose your fields before you open any study. Fill each field from the same part of every article. Write "not reported" where information is missing. Report results in each study's own terms, with intervals where given. Read across the rows for differences in population, dose, comparator and duration before you say anything about the overall picture. Compare your table with any published review on the same question. If your table keeps coming out uneven, we can rebuild a sample table from your studies. Fill every cell before you write a single sentence of comparison. Keep the same wording for the same kind of result across rows.
Get a INHE 3003 Week 9 example written to your instructions
Fields differ between sections, so the column list your classroom specified should travel with the studies and the criteria the table is graded against. A custom table returns inside 24-48h, first one at no cost. Extraction discipline only shows properly against the columns you are actually required to fill, and a guessed set teaches nothing.
More INHE 3003 papers and BS in Integrative Health samples
- INHE 3003 Week 1: Testable Claim Post
- INHE 3003 Week 2: Study Design Brief
- INHE 3003 Week 3: PICO Question
- INHE 3003 Week 4: Search Log
- INHE 3003 Week 5: Methods Summary
- INHE 3003 Week 6: Abstract Ceiling Post
- INHE 3003 Week 7: Statistics Interpretation
- INHE 3003 Week 8: Article Appraisal
- INHE 3003 Week 10: Peer Response Replies
- INHE 3003 Week 11: Reading Habit Reflection
- INHE 3004 Week 9: Privacy Policy Critique
- INHE 3002 Week 9: Comparison Table
- INHE 3001 Week 9: Policy Memo
- INHE 4001 Week 9: Implementation Brief
INHE 3003 Week 9 questions, answered
Where can I find a free INHE 3003 Week 9 sample paper?
The evidence table of three turmeric trials is reproduced on this page.
How many trials are in the table?
Three randomized trials, two against placebo and one against ibuprofen.
Why can't the trials simply be combined?
They used different preparations, comparators, populations and durations.
How is missing information shown?
Cells say "not stated in abstract" rather than being left blank.
What did the meta-analysis conclude?
Turmeric showed pain benefits, but the number, size and quality of trials were not enough for definitive conclusions.