2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2012.03.004
|Get access via publisher |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts

Development of differential criteria on tongue coating thickness in tongue diagnosis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
31
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For decades, TKM experts have attempted to standardize various TKM diagnostic methods through clinical trials. [4][5][6] As a result, validated tools such as questionnaires for Qi stagnation 4 and yin-deficiency, 5 tongue diagnostic device, 6 iridology, 7 and pulse diagnostic classification 8 were developed. However, standardization and quantification of AE have not been performed before.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For decades, TKM experts have attempted to standardize various TKM diagnostic methods through clinical trials. [4][5][6] As a result, validated tools such as questionnaires for Qi stagnation 4 and yin-deficiency, 5 tongue diagnostic device, 6 iridology, 7 and pulse diagnostic classification 8 were developed. However, standardization and quantification of AE have not been performed before.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first difference is the proportion of the tongue coating area. The a * dimension of the TDCH, which describes the intensity of the red color, is one of the crucial parameters of the tongue body and coating [12]. Figure 3 shows areas corresponding to the color ranges of the seven variables in a tongue image.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The CTIS measured the TCT, which is widely used in clinical tongue diagnosis as an objective and useful parameter [22, 23]. The cut-off points that separated no coating ( 薄胎 ) and thick coating ( 厚苔 ) from thin coating (normal) were 29.06% and 63.51%, respectively [23].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%