Journal of Physiology & Pathology in Korean Medicine (동의생리병리학회지)

The Physiological Society of Korean Medicine and The Society of Pathology in Korean Medicine (대한동의생리학회·한의병리학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Identifying Theoretical Characteristics of Traditional Medicines in Korea, China, and Japan through the Herb Usage Data

한약재 사용량 데이터 분석을 통한 한국, 중국, 일본 전통의학의 이론적 특성 비교연구

  • Park, Mu Sun (Department of Physiology, College of Korean Medicine, Gachon University) ;
  • Lee, Choong Yeol (Department of Physiology, College of Korean Medicine, Gachon University) ;
  • Lee, Tae Hee (Department of Formulae Pharmacology, College of Korean Medicine, Gachon University) ;
  • Kim, Youn Sub (Department of Anatomy-Pointology, College of Korean Medicine, Gachon University) ;
  • Kim, Chang Eop (Department of Physiology, College of Korean Medicine, Gachon University)
  • 박무순 (가천대학교 한의과대학 생리학교실) ;
  • 이충열 (가천대학교 한의과대학 생리학교실) ;
  • 이태희 (가천대학교 한의과대학 방제학교실) ;
  • 김연섭 (가천대학교 한의과대학 해부경혈학교실) ;
  • 김창업 (가천대학교 한의과대학 생리학교실)
  • Received : 2018.04.30
  • Accepted : 2018.06.29
  • Published : 2018.06.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Traditional medicines (TM) in Korea, China, and Japan share most of the theories and therapeutic tools, but there are also differences due to their unique histories and cultures. Here, we aim to identify the differences in the utilization of TM theory between three countries by analyzing herb usage data in terms of the related traditional theories. Herb usage data of each country was collected from "Investigation of Korean medicine use and herbal medicine consumption survey" (Korea), "Analytical report on circulation of key Chinese medicinal materials" (China), and "Survey report on raw material crude drug usage" (Japan). Fifty five herbs with sixty features belonging to five theoretical categories (four properties, five tastes, targeting meridians, treatment strategies, and herbal parts) were selected and analyzed. Weight Sum Model (WSM) and Network-Based Group Features (NBGF) were used to compare the theoretical characteristics of TM between three countries. For the statistical evaluation, we developed and applied Herb Set Enrichment Analysis (HSEA) for WSM and NBGF results. HSEA for WSM results revealed the kidney meridian were targeted more in Korea than Japan, while the spleen meridian were targeted more in Japan than Korea. Herbs with sour taste were used more in Japan than China. HSEA for NBGF results found that NBGF including warm, neutral, sweet, and tonifying features were more dominant in Korea and than Japan, while NBGF including cold, bitter, heat-clearing features were more dominant in Japan than the others. These results suggest that TM in Korea, China, and Japan have unique aspects of practice patterns and theoretical utilization.

Keywords

References

  1. Park HL, Lee HS, Shin BC, Liu JP, Shang Q, Yamashita H, et al. Traditional Medicine in China, Korea, and Japan: A Brief Introduction and Comparison. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2012;2012:429103.
  2. Cho KH. The Comparative Study of Oriental Medicine in Korea, Japan and China. Journal of Korean Oriental Medicine. 1998;19(1):271-98.
  3. Lim DO, Jung MJ, Park JS, Seo GS, Hwang JW, Kim EY, et al. Investigation of Korean medicine use and herbal medicine consumption survey. Korea Health Industry Developement Institute; 2014.
  4. Survey report on raw material crude drug usage. Japan: Japan Kampo Medicines Manufacturers Association; 2011, 2013, 2015, 2016.
  5. Analytical Report on Circulation of Key Chinese Medicinal Materials. China: Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China Department of Market Supervision; 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015.
  6. van der Heijden GJMG, T. Donders AR, Stijnen T, Moons KGM. Imputation of missing values is superior to complete case analysis and the missing-indicator method in multivariable diagnostic research: A clinical example. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2006;59(10):1102-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.01.015
  7. Real R, Vargas JM. The Probabilistic Basis of Jaccard's Index of Similarity. Systematic Biology. 1996;45(3):380-5. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/45.3.380
  8. Shannon P, Markiel A, Ozier O, Baliga NS, Wang JT, Ramage D, et al. Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome Res. 2003;13(11):2498-504. Available from: http://www.cytoscape.org https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.1239303
  9. Blondel VD, Guillaume JL, Lambiotte R, Lefebvre E. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J Stat Mech-Theory E. 2008;2008(Issue 10).
  10. Subramanian A, Tamayo P, Mootha VK, Mukherjee S, Ebert BL, Gillette MA, et al. Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;102(43):15545-50. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0506580102
  11. Kanehisa M, Goto S. KEGG: kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2000;28(1):27-30. Available from: http://www.genome.ad.jp/kegg/ https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/28.1.27
  12. Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA, Botstein D, Butler H, Cherry JM, et al. Gene ontology:tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat Genet. 2000;25(1):25-9. Available from: http://www.geneontology.org/ https://doi.org/10.1038/75556