Objective： To survey the reporting quality of traditional Chinese medicine （TCM） case reports published in recent years and understand the common problems. The assessment results would lay the foundation for the de...Objective： To survey the reporting quality of traditional Chinese medicine （TCM） case reports published in recent years and understand the common problems. The assessment results would lay the foundation for the development of recommendations for case report in Chinese medicine. Methods： This survey determined the reporting quality of cases with Chinese herbal decoction, Chinese proprietary medicine, acupuncture, moxibustion and other traditional therapies published in 20 core medical journals of China by searching the China Academic Journals Full-text Database from 2006 to 2010. Fifty survey items in 16 domains were used to determine the reporting quality. One point was assigned to each item （Yes=l point; No=0 point）, and total score was 50 points. The domain of treatment was assessed independently, ranging from 2 to 9 items for different TCM interventions. Results： The total of 1,658 case reports, covering 3,417 cases were included to analyze from 13 out of 20 core medical journals of China. There were 74.8% of them did not identify the nature of study in title, while 73.9% did not comprise an abstract. Incomplete reporting was found in discussions/ comment, and only 38.9% had made recommendations or take-away messages. Figures and tables were infrequently used. Three cases cited the full names of patients, but without declaring that any consent was obtained. Over 90% reported the symptoms and signs of TCM, and characteristics on tongue and pulse, but less than 50% did mention other medical history and diagnostic rationale. More than 90% treatments of the included cases were herbal decoction, with clear reporting on the ingredients and dosages. However, the reporting rate of the dosages of each ingredient was just 48.4%. Almost none reported the quality control of crude herbs, manufacturers and lot numbers of herbal proprietary medicine. Besides, advices and precautions on diet, emotions and living were rare to be illustrated. Conclusion： Systematic reporting recommendations are urged to develop for improving the contents and format of case reports in TCM.展开更多
OBJECTIVE： To evaluate the application of health assessment instruments in Chinese medicine. METHODS： According to a pre-defined search strategy, a comprehensive literature search for all articles published in China...OBJECTIVE： To evaluate the application of health assessment instruments in Chinese medicine. METHODS： According to a pre-defined search strategy, a comprehensive literature search for all articles published in China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases was conducted. The resulting articles that met the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria were used for analysis. RESULTS： A total of 97 instruments for health outcome assessment in Chinese medicine have been used in fundamental and theoretical research, and 14 of these were also used in 29 clinical trials that were randomized controlled trials, or descriptive or cross-sectional studies. In 2 152 Chinese medicine-based studies that used instruments in their methodology, more than 150 questionnaires were identified. Among the identified questionnaires, 51 were used in more than 10 articles （0.5%）. Most of these instruments were developed in Western countries and few studies （4%） used the instrument as the primary evidence for their conclusions. CONCLUSION： Usage of instruments for health outcome assessment in Chinese medicine is increasing rapidly; however, current limitations include selection rationale, result interpretation and standardization, which must be addressed accordingly.展开更多
【目的】参照中医药单病例随机对照研究(N-of-1)试验指南(TCM-CENT)中的条目,对中医药领域应用N-of-1的试验报告质量进行评估。【方法】检索中国知网(CNKI)、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、中文期刊数据库(维普)、万方数据库(万方)、超...【目的】参照中医药单病例随机对照研究(N-of-1)试验指南(TCM-CENT)中的条目,对中医药领域应用N-of-1的试验报告质量进行评估。【方法】检索中国知网(CNKI)、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、中文期刊数据库(维普)、万方数据库(万方)、超星期刊、PubMed、Web of Science等主要中英文文献数据库中的中医药N-of-1试验报告。由两名研究人员筛选合格的文章,并独立提取数据。参照TCM-CENT条目对纳入的文献进行计分并评估其报告质量。【结果】共纳入24篇(中文20篇,英文4篇)中医药N-of-1试验报告,其中单一N-of-1试验3篇,系列N-of-1试验21篇。两名评审员评价的一致性较高,Kappa值平均值为93%,有27个条目判断一致,最低值为65%,对应第16和第21条条目。条目平均报告率为61%,其中报告率为100%的有9个,未进行报告的有4个。讨论部分平均报告率最高(92%),其他信息部分平均报告率最低(25%)。单篇的报告率平均值为62%。【结论】中医药临床应用N-of-1试验尚处于起步状态,发展缓慢,试验报告的总体质量一般,在随机方法设计、样本量估算、不良反应报告及分析、试验方案的注册等方面,有待进一步完善和提高。展开更多
基金Supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China(No.81173363)Health and Medical Research FundFood and Health Bureau,Hong Kong SAR,China(No.09101501)
文摘Objective： To survey the reporting quality of traditional Chinese medicine （TCM） case reports published in recent years and understand the common problems. The assessment results would lay the foundation for the development of recommendations for case report in Chinese medicine. Methods： This survey determined the reporting quality of cases with Chinese herbal decoction, Chinese proprietary medicine, acupuncture, moxibustion and other traditional therapies published in 20 core medical journals of China by searching the China Academic Journals Full-text Database from 2006 to 2010. Fifty survey items in 16 domains were used to determine the reporting quality. One point was assigned to each item （Yes=l point; No=0 point）, and total score was 50 points. The domain of treatment was assessed independently, ranging from 2 to 9 items for different TCM interventions. Results： The total of 1,658 case reports, covering 3,417 cases were included to analyze from 13 out of 20 core medical journals of China. There were 74.8% of them did not identify the nature of study in title, while 73.9% did not comprise an abstract. Incomplete reporting was found in discussions/ comment, and only 38.9% had made recommendations or take-away messages. Figures and tables were infrequently used. Three cases cited the full names of patients, but without declaring that any consent was obtained. Over 90% reported the symptoms and signs of TCM, and characteristics on tongue and pulse, but less than 50% did mention other medical history and diagnostic rationale. More than 90% treatments of the included cases were herbal decoction, with clear reporting on the ingredients and dosages. However, the reporting rate of the dosages of each ingredient was just 48.4%. Almost none reported the quality control of crude herbs, manufacturers and lot numbers of herbal proprietary medicine. Besides, advices and precautions on diet, emotions and living were rare to be illustrated. Conclusion： Systematic reporting recommendations are urged to develop for improving the contents and format of case reports in TCM.
基金supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(No.81073163)
文摘OBJECTIVE： To evaluate the application of health assessment instruments in Chinese medicine. METHODS： According to a pre-defined search strategy, a comprehensive literature search for all articles published in China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases was conducted. The resulting articles that met the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria were used for analysis. RESULTS： A total of 97 instruments for health outcome assessment in Chinese medicine have been used in fundamental and theoretical research, and 14 of these were also used in 29 clinical trials that were randomized controlled trials, or descriptive or cross-sectional studies. In 2 152 Chinese medicine-based studies that used instruments in their methodology, more than 150 questionnaires were identified. Among the identified questionnaires, 51 were used in more than 10 articles （0.5%）. Most of these instruments were developed in Western countries and few studies （4%） used the instrument as the primary evidence for their conclusions. CONCLUSION： Usage of instruments for health outcome assessment in Chinese medicine is increasing rapidly; however, current limitations include selection rationale, result interpretation and standardization, which must be addressed accordingly.
文摘【目的】参照中医药单病例随机对照研究(N-of-1)试验指南(TCM-CENT)中的条目,对中医药领域应用N-of-1的试验报告质量进行评估。【方法】检索中国知网(CNKI)、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、中文期刊数据库(维普)、万方数据库(万方)、超星期刊、PubMed、Web of Science等主要中英文文献数据库中的中医药N-of-1试验报告。由两名研究人员筛选合格的文章,并独立提取数据。参照TCM-CENT条目对纳入的文献进行计分并评估其报告质量。【结果】共纳入24篇(中文20篇,英文4篇)中医药N-of-1试验报告,其中单一N-of-1试验3篇,系列N-of-1试验21篇。两名评审员评价的一致性较高,Kappa值平均值为93%,有27个条目判断一致,最低值为65%,对应第16和第21条条目。条目平均报告率为61%,其中报告率为100%的有9个,未进行报告的有4个。讨论部分平均报告率最高(92%),其他信息部分平均报告率最低(25%)。单篇的报告率平均值为62%。【结论】中医药临床应用N-of-1试验尚处于起步状态,发展缓慢,试验报告的总体质量一般,在随机方法设计、样本量估算、不良反应报告及分析、试验方案的注册等方面,有待进一步完善和提高。
