Table 1. Characteristics of articles of Moxibustion for Dry eye syndrome

Author	Sample size	Style of moxibustion	Acupoints/region(I)	Treatment session & period (I)	Time (I)	Intervention group	Control group	Outcome measurements	Main result (I/C)	Safety
Song (2007)18)	40 (20/20)	Indirect (warming, circling, bird-pecking moxibustion)	BL1, BL2, EX-HN4, ST2/eye, ear	1 per a day/total 4weeks	20~30 min	Thunder-fire Moxibustion+AT	AT	1. Subjective symptom score2. BUT3. SIT4. FL(P<0.05)	1,2. I>C(P<0.05)3. I=C(P>0.05)	N.R
Wang (2009)19)	43 (21/22)->40 (20/20)	Indirect (warming, circling, bird-pecking moxibustion)	BL1, BL2, EX-HN4, ST2/eye, ear	1 per a day/4weeks for 1 session, total 1 session	20~30 min	Thunder-fire Moxibustion+AT	AT	1. Total efficacy rate2. Subjective symptom score3. BUT4. SIT5. FL	1. I>C(P<0.05)I: 87.5C: 752,5. I=C(P>0.05)3,4. I>C(P<0.05)	N.R
Ren (2011)20	42 (22/20)->40 (22/18)	Indirect (warming, circling moxibustion)	BL1, BL2, EX-HN4, ST2, TE21, LI4/forehead, eye, ear	N.R	20min	Thunder-fire Moxibustion	CA	1. Subjective symptom score2. SIT3. BUT	1. I>C(p<0.05)= In eye dryness, uncomfortable symptom of red eye.2,3. I=C(p>0.05)	N.R
Ju (2012)21	84 (42/42)	Indirect (warming, circling, bird-pecking moxibustion)	BL1, BL2/eye, ear	1 per a day/4weeks for 1 session, total 1 session	15~25 min	Thunder-fire Moxibustion+AT	AT	1. Total efficacy rate	1. p-value=N.RI: 95.52C: 80.9	N.R
Liu (2013)22)	40 (20/20)	Indirect (circling, bird-pecking moxibustion)	TE21/eye, ear	1 per a day/10days for 1 session, total 1 session	10min	Stick moxibustion+Chinese herbal fumigation	Chinese herbal fumigation	1. Total efficacy rate2. Subjective symptom score	1. I>C(P<0.05)I:95.33C:79.102. I>C(P<0.05)	N.R
Song (2013)23)	80 (40/40)->77 (38/39)	Indirect (warming, circling, bird-pecking moxibustion)	BL1, BL2, EX-HN4, ST2, TE17/forehead, eye, ear	1 per a day/4 weeks for 1 session, total 1 session	20~30 min	Thunder-fire Moxibustion	AT	1. Total efficacy rate2. Total efficacy grade3. BUT4. SIT	1. I=C(p>0.05)I: 84C: 822. I>C(p<0.05)3,4. I>C(p<0.05)	N.R
Ren (2n014)24)	70 (37/33)	Inndirect (warming, bird-pecking moxibustion)	BL1, ST2, LI4/eye	1 per a day/10 days for 1 session, total 2 sessions	N.R	Thunder-fire Moxibustion	AT	1. Total efficacy rate	1. I>C(p<0.01)I: 97.30C: 66.67	N.R
Li (2016)25)	80 (40/40)	Indirect (circling moxibustion)	TE21, EX-HN5, BL2, ST2, LI4, BL1/forehead, eye,	1 per a day/10 days for 1 session, total 1 session	20min	Thunder-fire Moxibustion	AT	1. Total efficacy rate2. Subjective symptom score3. BUT4. SIT	1. I>C(p<0.05)I: 92.50%C: 75.50%2,3,4. I>C(p<0.05)	N.R
Fu (2018)26)	96 (48/48)->84 (44/40)	Indirect (Use wire to make a glass frame which can fix two walnut shells and moxa roll in front of the eyes)	N.R/eye	1 per 2 days, 3 days per a week/total 4 weeks	45min	Walnut-shell Moxibustion	AT	1. OSDI2. OSDI efficacy rate3. VAS4. BUT5. FL6. SIT	#At 4 weeks1,4. I=C(p>0.05)2. I=C(p>0.05)I: 34.09C:30.003. I>C(p<0.05)5,6. I=C(✕)(p>0.05)#At 8, 16, 28 weeks1,3. A=B(p>0.05)	O
Xu (2018)27)	84 (44/40)A=33:11(ATD:MGD)	Indirect (Use wire to make a glass frame which can fix two walnut shells and moxa roll in front of the eyes)	N.R/eye	1 per 2 days, 3 days per a week/total 4 weeks	45min	Walnut-shell Moxibustion	AT	1. VAS2. OSDI3. BUT4. FL5. SIT6. Total efficacy rate	1. I>C(p<0.05)2,3. I=C(p>0.05)4.5. I=C(✕)(p>0.05)6. I=C(p>0.05)A: 52.3B: 40.0#In A group1,2,3. ATD=MGD(p>0.05)	O
Fun (2018)28)	67 (33/34)->64 (33/31)	Indirect (Use wire to make a glass frame which can fix two walnut shells and moxa roll in front of the eyes)	N.R/eye	1 per 2 days, 3 days per a week/total 4 weeks	45min	Walnut-shell Moxibustion	AT	1. OSDI2. VAS3. BUT4. SIT5. FL	1,2,3. I=C(p>0.05)4.5. I=C(✕)(p>0.05)	O
Chen(2018)29)	70 (36/34)	Indirect (circling, bird-pecking moxibustion)	BL2, EX-HN4, GB1, EX-HN5, ST2, BL1, TE21, TE17, LI4/forehead, eye, ear	1 per a day/10 days for 1 session, total 2 sessions	20min	Thunder-fire Moxibustion	AT	1. Subjective symptom score2. Visual acuity3. SIT4. BUT5. FL6. Total efficacy rate	1,3,4. I>C(p<0.05)2,5. I=C(p>0.05)6. I>C(p<0.05)A: 73.6B: 55.9	N.R

Schirmer I Test: SIT, Tear break-up time: BUT, Fluoresceine staining: FL, Ocular surface disease index: OSDI, Visual Analogue Scale: VAS
Intervention group: I, Control group: C, Artificial Tears: AT, Common acupuncture: CA, Meibomian Gland Dysfunction: MGD, Aqueous Tear Deficiency: ATD, Not reported: N.R p<0.05: significantly different between two groups after treatment, p<0.01: significantly different between two groups after treatment, p>0.05: not significantly different between two groups after treatment, ✕= the result did not change significantly before and after treatment in the two groups(p>0.05)