How do systematic reviews of acupuncture for pain relief incorporate risk of bias assessments into the synthesis? A methodological study

Acupuncture in Medicine

Volumn 34, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 84-89

  Li, Xiao Qian ^a   Tao, Kun Ming ^b   Yang, Ge Liang ^a   Zhou, Qing Hui ^a   Ling, Chang Quan ^a  

^a SECOND MILITARY MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b SECOND MILITARY MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACUPUNCTURE; ANALGESIA; DATA SYNTHESIS; HUMAN; SYNTHESIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; EVALUATION STUDY; METHODOLOGY; PROCEDURES; RISK ASSESSMENT; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ACUPUNCTURE THERAPY; HUMANS; PAIN MANAGEMENT; RESEARCH DESIGN; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84962853181     PISSN: 09645284     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/acupmed-2015-010876     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Liu G, Ma HJ, Hu PP, et al. Effects of painful stimulation and acupuncture on attention networks in healthy subjects. Behav Brain Funct 2013;9:23.
2. Ernst E. Acupuncture- A critical analysis. J Intern Med 2006;259:125-37.
3. Lee EJ, Frazier SK. The efficacy of acupressure for symptom management: A systematic review. J Pain Symptom Manage 2011;42:589-603.
4. Colquhoun D, Novella SP. Acupuncture is theatrical placebo. Anesth Analg 2013;116:1360-3.
5. Adams D, Cheng F, Jou H, et al. The safety of pediatric acupuncture: A systematic review. Pediatrics 2011;128: E1575-87.
6. Usichenko TI, Wolters P, Anders EF, et al. Acupuncture reduces pain and autonomic distress during injection of local anesthetic in children- A pragmatic crossover investigation. Clin J Pain Published Online First: 25 Feb 2015. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000222
7. Lee MS, Ernst E. Acupuncture for pain: An overview of Cochrane reviews. Chin J Integr Med 2011;17:187-9.
8. Madsen MV, Gøtzsche PC, Hróbjartsson A. Acupuncture treatment for pain: Systematic review of randomised clinical trials with acupuncture, placebo acupuncture, and no acupuncture groups. BMJ 2009;338:a3115.
9. Ernst E, Lee MS, Choi TY. Acupuncture: Does it alleviate pain and are there serious risks? A review of reviews. Pain 2011;152:755-64.
10. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Evidence-based medicine: A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA 1992;268:2420-5.
11. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration 2011.
12. Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, et al. Incorporating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:255-65.
13. Katikireddi SV, Egan M, Petticrew M. How do systematic reviews incorporate risk of bias assessments into the synthesis of evidence? A methodological study. J Epidemiol Community Health 2015;69:189-95.
14. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011;343:d5928.
15. Montori VM, Wilczynski NL, Morgan D, et al. Hedges Team. Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: Analytical survey. BMJ 2005;330:68.
16. Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB, Hedges Team. EMBASE search strategies achieved high sensitivity and specificity for retrieving methodologically sound systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2007;60:29-33.
17. Fan AY. "Obamacare" covers fifty-four million Americans for acupuncture as Essential Healthcare Benefit. J Integr Med 2014;12:390-3.
18. Fan AY. The methodology flaws in Hinman's acupuncture clinical trial, part I: Design and results interpretation. J Integr Med 2015;13:65-8.
19. Ernst E, Pittler MH, Wider B, et al. Acupuncture: Its evidence-base is changing. Am J Chin Med 2007;35:21-5.
20. Johnson MI. The clinical effectiveness of acupuncture for pain relief-you can be certain of uncertainty. Acupunct Med 2006;24:71-9.
21. Jüni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, et al. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA 1999;282:1054-60.
22. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, et al. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: An annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials 1995;16:62-73.
23. Mhaskar R, Djulbegovic B, Magazin A, et al. Published methodological quality of randomized controlled trials does not reflect the actual quality assessed in protocols. J Clin Epidemiol 2012;65:602-9.
24. Carr D. Raising the bar on the ethical standards of acupuncture research. Acupunct Med 2015;33:178-9.
25. Fleming PS, Koletsi D, Seehra J, et al. Systematic reviews published in higher impact clinical journals were of higher quality. J Clin Epidemiol 2014;67:754-9.
26. Moja LP, Telaro E, D'Amico R, et al. Assessment of methodological quality of primary studies by systematic reviews: Results of the metaquality cross sectional study. BMJ 2005;330:1053.
27. Cohen JF, Korevaar DA, Wang J, et al. Should we search Chinese biomedical databases when performing systematic reviews? Syst Rev 2015;4:23.
28. Qiu J. Publish or perish in China. Nature 2010;463:142-3.
29. Vickers A, Goyal N, Harland R, et al. Do certain countries produce only positive results? A systematic review of controlled trials. Control Clin Trials 1998;19:159-66.
30. Tang JL, Zhan SY, Ernst E. Review of randomised controlled trials of traditional Chinese medicine. BMJ 1999;319:160-1.