Methodological evaluation on domestic clinical trials on traditional Chinese medicine nursing from 2006 to 2011

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Volumn 12, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 735-739

  Mei, Li juan ^a   Zheng, Guo hua ^a   Chen, Qing yue ^a   Lin, Run ^a   Yan, Yu ^a   Yang, Zhi hong ^a  

^a FUJIAN UNIVERSITY OF TRADITIONAL CHINESE MEDICINE   (China)

Author keywords

Clinical trial; Nursing; Quality evaluation; Traditional Chinese medicine

Indexed keywords

CHINESE MEDICINE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; NURSING; PUBLISHING; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; STUDY DESIGN; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT WITHDRAWAL;

EID: 84863803518     PISSN: 16722531     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Chinese Source.
2. Chinese Source.
3. Chinese Source.
4. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org.
5. Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L, CONSORT Group (Consolidated Standards for Reports of Trials). Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative beforeand-after evaluation. JAMA, 2001, 285(15): 1992-1995.
6. Chinese Source.
7. Chinese Source.
8. Chinese Source.
9. Chinese Source.
10. Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Allocation concealment in randomized trials: Defending against deciphering. Lancet, 2002, 359(9306): 614-618.
11. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, et al. Empirical evidence of bias: dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of effects in controlled trials. JAMA, 1995, 273(5): 408-412.
12. Chinese Source.
13. Chinese Source. CONSORT Chinese Source, 2008, 23(1): 25-27.
14. Chinese Source.
15. Chinese Source.
16. Chinese Source.
17. Chinese Source.