Do the CONSORT and STRICTA Checklists Improve the Reporting Quality of Acupuncture and Moxibustion Randomized Controlled Trials Published in Chinese Journals? A Systematic Review and Analysis of Trends

Ma, Baochun; Chen, Zhimin; Xu, Jia-ke; Wang, Yanan; Chen, Kuang-yang; Ke, Fayong; Niu, Junqiang; Li, Li; Huang, Chunming; Zheng, Jian-xun; Jian, Yang; Zhu, Qian-ge; Wang, Yaping

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147244

Cited by 48 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Otros estudios (10,29) encontraron como factores asociados, el año de publicación y el idioma de publicación. La asociación con la revista de publicación se puede explicar mediante el hecho de que muchas revistas en idioma inglés ya incluyen como requisito para autores el cumplimiento de los criterios STRICTA (11,14) . También es importante mencionar que a pesar del uso de los criterios STRICTA, estos no permiten detectar fallas en la estructura del diseño del ensayo clínico, por ejemplo: una selección incompleta de puntos de acupuntura, acupunturistas no calificados o no capacitados, negligencias al momento de reportar las respuestas a la introducción de la aguja, mala elección del placebo o mal procedimiento en los tratamientos simulados (33) .…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cumplimiento de los criterios stricta en ensayos clínicos latinoamericanos en acupuntura

López¹,

Ángulo-Bazán²

2016

Rev. per. med. integr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objetivo: Determinar los factores asociados y el cumplimiento de los "Standards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture" (STRICTA) en ensayos clínicos latinoamericanos publicados en revistas indexadas entre los años 2011-2015. Materiales y Métodos: Revisión sistemática. Se realizó la búsqueda bibliográfica en las bases de datos: SCOPUS, PubMed, SciELO y BVS. Se evaluó el año de publicación, revista de publicación, numero de autores, país del autor corresponsal, país colaborador, idioma de publicación, numero de citas, procedimiento experimental, enfermedad o condición de estudio. El cumplimiento de los criterios STRICTA se midió por porcentaje de cumplimiento de los 17 ítems y por puntaje total obtenido. Resultados: Se encontraron 53 estudios que cumplieron los criterios de inclusión. Brasil representa el 79.3% de las publicaciones. Se observa una tendencia creciente pero irregular de publicación y poca cooperación internacional. Los procedimientos más usados fueron acupuntura (47.2%), Electroacupuntura (13.2%) y Auriculopuntura con agujas (9.4%). El puntaje STRICTA promedio fue de 7.5±3.8 puntos, los criterios con mayor cumplimiento fueron los nombres de los puntos (86.8%) y el número y frecuencia/duración de las sesiones (77.4% y 75.5%). Se encontró asociación significativa con la revista de publicación (p=0.018) y el idioma inglés (p=0.049). Conclusiones: El cumplimiento de los criterios STRICTA, está por debajo de otros países, encontrándose como factores asociados, la revista donde se publicó el estudio y el idioma de publicación en inglés.

show abstract

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…En este contexto, los países como China y Corea, que representan una importante proporción de producción científica en acupuntura (8,9) , ya han desarrollado algunos estudios (10)(11)(12) donde se muestra que, si bien la calidad de los ensayos clínicos ha mejorado, aún algunos ítems permanecen como subóptimos.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Cumplimiento de los criterios stricta en ensayos clínicos latinoamericanos en acupuntura

López¹,

Ángulo-Bazán²

2016

Rev. per. med. integr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…STRICTA recommend that six items should be included: rationale, details of needling (e.g., points used, depth, angle, needle thickness, number of needles), treatment regimen, co-intervention, practitioner background and control interventions [219]. The impact of using STRICTA has been positive with improvements in reporting quality of RCTs on acupuncture [220][221][222][223]. In 2008, White et al published a meta-analysis that provided evidence that better outcomes in comparisons of acupuncture with non-acupuncture controls were achieved when noted that greater numbers of needles and treatment sessions were used [214].…”

Section: The Challenge Of Adequacy Of Dosementioning

confidence: 99%

Acupuncture for the Relief of Chronic Pain: A Synthesis of Systematic Reviews

Paley

Johnson

2019

Medicina

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: It is estimated that 28 million people in the UK live with chronic pain. A biopsychosocial approach to chronic pain is recommended which combines pharmacological interventions with behavioural and non-pharmacological treatments. Acupuncture represents one of a number of non-pharmacological interventions for pain. In the current climate of difficult commissioning decisions and constantly changing national guidance, the quest for strong supporting evidence has never been more important. Although hundreds of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses have been conducted, most have been inconclusive, and this has created uncertainty in clinical policy and practice. There is a need to bring all the evidence together for different pain conditions. The aim of this review is to synthesise SRs of RCTs evaluating the clinical efficacy of acupuncture to alleviate chronic pain and to consider the quality and adequacy of the evidence, including RCT design. Materials and Methods: Electronic databases were searched for English language SRs and meta-analyses on acupuncture for chronic pain. The SRs were scrutinised for methodology, risk of bias and judgement of efficacy. Results: A total of 177 reviews of acupuncture from 1989 to 2019 met our eligibility criteria. The majority of SRs found that RCTs of acupuncture had methodological shortcomings, including inadequate statistical power with a high risk of bias. Heterogeneity between RCTs was such that meta-analysis was often inappropriate. Conclusions: The large quantity of RCTs on acupuncture for chronic pain contained within systematic reviews provide evidence that is conflicting and inconclusive, due in part to recurring methodological shortcomings of RCTs. We suggest that an enriched enrolment with randomised withdrawal design may overcome some of these methodological shortcomings. It is essential that the quality of evidence is improved so that healthcare providers and commissioners can make informed choices on the interventions which can legitimately be provided to patients living with chronic pain.

show abstract

“…Acupuncture has long been used in East-Asian countries, and is recently gaining popularity not only in East-Asian countries but also in Western countries [21][22][23][24] . Accordingly, the number of acupuncture publications including RCT reports has increased over the past decades 25,26) . However, reporting biases in acupuncture RCTs hamper the reliability of the evidence.…”

Section: the International Committee Of Medical Journal Editorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Firstly, articles written in Chinese were not included in the analyses. Considering that approximately 2,000 acupuncture RCTs were published in the past 20 years 26) , the reporting biases in Chinese articles should be taken into account and compared with articles written in English in future analyses. Secondly, we did not further search trial registries for the studies that did not provide the registration numbers in the published articles.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitations Of This Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of Trial Registration with Reporting Biases in Randomized Controlled Trials of Acupuncture

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives : To investigate the association of trial registration status with presence of reporting bias including publication bias and outcome reporting bias in recently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture. Methods : A PubMed search for RCTs of acupuncture published from March 2016 to February 2017 was conducted. Primary outcomes were identified and the direction of the results was judged as positive (i.e., statistically significant) or negative. The trial registration was identified by manually screening the trial registration number in the main text of the published article and classified into 1) prospective registration; 2) retrospective registration based on the registration date or; 3) no registration. Results : Of the 125 included RCTs, only 40 studies (32.0%) prospectively registered the study protocols. Among 65 RCTs that adequately reported the primary outcome, unregistered trials were more likely to report positive results than the registered ones (p=0.013). Of the 40 prospectively registered studies, 19 trials (47.5%) had the discrepancies between the registered and published primary outcomes and furthermore, 40% of them reported the positive findings. Conclusions : Unregistered trials were more likely to report positive results and the discrepancies between the registered and published primary outcomes were detected in about a half of the prospectively registered studies, 42.1% of which tended to report positive findings. Journal editors and researchers in this field should be alerted to various reporting biases.

show abstract

Do the CONSORT and STRICTA Checklists Improve the Reporting Quality of Acupuncture and Moxibustion Randomized Controlled Trials Published in Chinese Journals? A Systematic Review and Analysis of Trends

Cited by 48 publications

References 16 publications

Cumplimiento de los criterios stricta en ensayos clínicos latinoamericanos en acupuntura

Cumplimiento de los criterios stricta en ensayos clínicos latinoamericanos en acupuntura

Acupuncture for the Relief of Chronic Pain: A Synthesis of Systematic Reviews

Association of Trial Registration with Reporting Biases in Randomized Controlled Trials of Acupuncture

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About