采用国际公认的试验报告统一标准CONSORT (Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials,CONSORT)声明和报告针刺临床试验中干预措施的国际标准STRICTA(Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture...采用国际公认的试验报告统一标准CONSORT (Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials,CONSORT)声明和报告针刺临床试验中干预措施的国际标准STRICTA(Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture,STRICTA)评价近10年国内外针刺治疗慢性颈痛的随机对照试验(randomized controlled trial,RCT)的报告质量。计算机检索针刺治疗慢性颈痛的RCT,英文文献通过PubMed和EMbase,中文文献通过中国知网、万方数据知识服务平台、维普中文期刊服务平台、中国生物医学文献数据库,检索时限为2008年1月至2018年1月。最终纳入29篇中文文献和10篇英文文献。根据CONSORT条目,中文文献有28篇(96.6%)描述了基线资料,23篇(79.3%)描述了随机说明,0篇描述了分配隐藏,3篇(10.3%)提及盲法;英文文献有6篇(60.0%)描述了基线资料,8篇(80.0%)描述了随机说明,8篇(80.0%)描述了分配隐藏,7篇(70.0%)描述了盲法。根据STRICTA条目,中文文献有8篇(27.6%)描述了针具类型,18篇(62.1%)描述了针刺深度,24篇(82.8%)描述了针刺反应,0篇描述了治疗师资历;英文文献有5篇(50.0%)描述了针具类型,8篇(80.0%)描述了针刺深度,3篇(30.0%)描述了针刺反应,4篇(40.0%)描述了治疗师资历。中文文献在针刺细节的报告方面优于英文文献,英文文献在试验设计的报告方面略优于中文文献,而两者均有很多不足,需按照CONSORT声明和STRICTA标准进一步完善临床试验设计以提高临床证据的报告质量。展开更多
Objective To evaluate the quality of the existing studies and summarize evidence of important outcomes of meta-analyses/systematic reviews(MAs/SRs)of CFS.Methods Potentially eligible studies were searched in the follo...Objective To evaluate the quality of the existing studies and summarize evidence of important outcomes of meta-analyses/systematic reviews(MAs/SRs)of CFS.Methods Potentially eligible studies were searched in the following electronic databases from inception to 1 September,2019:Chinese Biomedical Literature Database(CBM),China Science and Technology Journal Database(VIP),China National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI),WanFang Database(WF),Web of Science,Embase,PubMed and Cochrane Library.Grades of Recommendation,Assessment,Development,and Evaluation(GRADE)was used to evaluate the quality of evidence.The methodological quality of the literature was evaluated by A Measure Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews-2(AMSTAR-2)and the quality of the report was assessed by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses(PRISMA).The intra-class correlation coefficient was used to assess the consistency of the reviewers,with an overall intraclass correlation coefficient score of 0.967.Results Ten MAs/SRs were included.The overall conclusions were that acupuncture had good safety and efficacy in the treatment of CFS,but some of these results were contradictory.The GRADE indicated that out of the 17 outcomes,high-quality evidence was provided in 0(0%),moderate in 3(17.65%),low in 10(58.82%),and very low in 4(23.53%).The results of AMSTAR-2 showed that the methodological quality of all included studies was critically low.The PRISMA statement revealed that 8 articles(80%)were in line with 20 of the 27-item checklist,and 2 articles(20%)matched with 10-19 of the 27 items.Conclusion We found that acupuncture on treating CFS has the advantage for efficacy and safety,but the quality of SRs/MAs of acupuncture for CFS need to be improved.展开更多
文摘采用国际公认的试验报告统一标准CONSORT (Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials,CONSORT)声明和报告针刺临床试验中干预措施的国际标准STRICTA(Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture,STRICTA)评价近10年国内外针刺治疗慢性颈痛的随机对照试验(randomized controlled trial,RCT)的报告质量。计算机检索针刺治疗慢性颈痛的RCT,英文文献通过PubMed和EMbase,中文文献通过中国知网、万方数据知识服务平台、维普中文期刊服务平台、中国生物医学文献数据库,检索时限为2008年1月至2018年1月。最终纳入29篇中文文献和10篇英文文献。根据CONSORT条目,中文文献有28篇(96.6%)描述了基线资料,23篇(79.3%)描述了随机说明,0篇描述了分配隐藏,3篇(10.3%)提及盲法;英文文献有6篇(60.0%)描述了基线资料,8篇(80.0%)描述了随机说明,8篇(80.0%)描述了分配隐藏,7篇(70.0%)描述了盲法。根据STRICTA条目,中文文献有8篇(27.6%)描述了针具类型,18篇(62.1%)描述了针刺深度,24篇(82.8%)描述了针刺反应,0篇描述了治疗师资历;英文文献有5篇(50.0%)描述了针具类型,8篇(80.0%)描述了针刺深度,3篇(30.0%)描述了针刺反应,4篇(40.0%)描述了治疗师资历。中文文献在针刺细节的报告方面优于英文文献,英文文献在试验设计的报告方面略优于中文文献,而两者均有很多不足,需按照CONSORT声明和STRICTA标准进一步完善临床试验设计以提高临床证据的报告质量。
基金the National Natural Science Foundation of China(No.81590951 and No.81722050)。
文摘Objective To evaluate the quality of the existing studies and summarize evidence of important outcomes of meta-analyses/systematic reviews(MAs/SRs)of CFS.Methods Potentially eligible studies were searched in the following electronic databases from inception to 1 September,2019:Chinese Biomedical Literature Database(CBM),China Science and Technology Journal Database(VIP),China National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI),WanFang Database(WF),Web of Science,Embase,PubMed and Cochrane Library.Grades of Recommendation,Assessment,Development,and Evaluation(GRADE)was used to evaluate the quality of evidence.The methodological quality of the literature was evaluated by A Measure Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews-2(AMSTAR-2)and the quality of the report was assessed by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses(PRISMA).The intra-class correlation coefficient was used to assess the consistency of the reviewers,with an overall intraclass correlation coefficient score of 0.967.Results Ten MAs/SRs were included.The overall conclusions were that acupuncture had good safety and efficacy in the treatment of CFS,but some of these results were contradictory.The GRADE indicated that out of the 17 outcomes,high-quality evidence was provided in 0(0%),moderate in 3(17.65%),low in 10(58.82%),and very low in 4(23.53%).The results of AMSTAR-2 showed that the methodological quality of all included studies was critically low.The PRISMA statement revealed that 8 articles(80%)were in line with 20 of the 27-item checklist,and 2 articles(20%)matched with 10-19 of the 27 items.Conclusion We found that acupuncture on treating CFS has the advantage for efficacy and safety,but the quality of SRs/MAs of acupuncture for CFS need to be improved.
