Reporting characteristics and risk of bias in randomised controlled trials of acupuncture analgesia published in PubMed-listed journals

Acupuncture in Medicine

Volumn 35, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 259-267

  Li, Xiuxia ^a   Wang, Rong ^b,c   Shi, Xiue ^d   Chen, Zehao ^a   Pan, Yuanqing ^a   Li, Xusheng ^c   Yang, Kehu ^a  

^a LANZHOU UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b GANSU UNIVERSITY OF CHINESE MEDICINE   (China)

^c JINAN MILITARY GENERAL HOSPITAL   (China)

^d Rehabilitation Center Hospital of Gansu   (China)

Author keywords

ACUPUNCTURE; EPIDEMIOLOGY; PAIN MANAGEMENT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS

Indexed keywords

ACUPUNCTURE; ACUPUNCTURE ANALGESIA; HUMAN; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; MEDLINE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ACUPUNCTURE ANALGESIA; ACUPUNCTURE POINTS; HUMANS; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; PUBMED; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 85011088717     PISSN: 09645284     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/acupmed-2016-011149     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Wu JN. A short history of acupuncture. J Altern Complement Med 1996;2:19-21.
2. Fan AY. "Obamacare" covers fifty-four million Americans for acupuncture as Essential Healthcare Benefit. J Integr Med 2014;12:390-3.
3. World Health Organization. Acupuncture: review and analysis of reports on controlled clinical trials. Geneva: World Health Organization 2002. http://www.who.int/iris/handle/10665/42414 (accessed 5 Jan 2017).
4. Vase L, Baram S, Takakura N, et al. Specifying the nonspecific components of acupuncture analgesia. Pain 2013;154:1659-67.
5. Sinha YK, Craig JC, Sureshkumar P, et al. Risk of bias in randomized trials of pharmacological interventions in children and adults. J Pediatr 2014;165:367-71.e1.
6. Chan AW, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals. Lancet 2005;365:1159-62.
7. Hopewell S, Dutton S, Yu LM, et al. The quality of reports of randomised trials in 2000 and 2006: comparative study of articles indexed in PubMed. BMJ 2010;340:c723.
8. Armijo-Olivo S, Stiles CR, Hagen NA, et al. Assessment of study quality for systematic reviews: a comparison of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool: methodological research. J Eval Clin Pract 2012;18:12-18.
9. Khan K, ter Riet G, Popay J, et al. Stage II conducting the review: phase 5 study quality assessment. In: Khan K, ter Riet G, Glanville J, et al, eds. Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness. York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2001. http://tna.europarchive.org/20000925173723/http:/www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/pdf/crdreport4-content.pdf (accessed 5 Jan 2017).
10. Schulz KF, Moher D, Altman DG. CONSORT 2010 comments. Lancet 2010;376:1222-3.
11. Macpherson H, Altman DG, Hammerschlag R, et al. Revised STandards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA): extending the CONSORT Statement. Acupunct Med 2010;28:83-93.
12. Higgins J, Altman D, Sterne AC. Chapter 8. Assessing risk of bias in included studiesIn: Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). London: The Cochrane Collaboration 2011 http://handbook.cochrane.org (accessed 5 Jan 2017).
13. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011;343:d5928.
14. Li XQ, Tao KM, Yang GL, et al. How do systematic reviews of acupuncture for pain relief incorporate risk of bias assessments into the synthesis? A methodological study. Acupunct Med 2016;34:84-9.
15. Prokosch V, Fink J, Heiduschka P. Randomised clinical trials on acupuncture in the Korean literature: bibliometric analysis and methodological quality. Acupunct Med 2014;32:160-6.
16. Robinson KA, Dickersin K. Development of a highly sensitive search strategy for the retrieval of reports of controlled trials using PubMed. Int J Epidemiol 2002;31:150-3.
17. Cochrane Pain, Palliative & Supportive Care Review Group. Authoring or assessing a Cochrane protocol, review, or review update for the PaPaS Review Group. Oxford: Cochrane Pain, Palliative & Supportive Care Review Group 2011. http://papas. cochrane.org/sites/papas.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/L% 20-%20PaPaSAuthor&RefereeGuidance.pdf (accessed 5 Jan 2017).
18. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, et al. GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence-study limitations (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:407-15.
19. NIH Consensus Conference. Acupuncture. JAMA 1998;280:1518-24.
20. Xiu-xia L, Ya Z, Yao-long C, et al. The reporting characteristics and methodological quality of Cochrane reviews about health policy research. Health Policy 2015;119:503-10.
21. Burke A, Upchurch DM, Dye C, et al. Acupuncture use in the United States: findings from the National Health Interview Survey. J Altern Complement Med 2006;12:639-48.
22. Hongwei Z, Jinling T. Design and selection of the placebo acupuncture in clinical trials. Chin J Integr Med 2003;23:247-50.
23. Melander H, Beermann B. Evidence b(i)ased medicine-selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applications. BMJ 2003;326:1171-3.
24. Mathieu S, Boutron I, Moher D, et al. Comparison of registered and published primary outcomes in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 2009;302:977-84.
25. Carr D. Raising the bar on the ethical standards of acupuncture research. Acupunct Med 2015;33:178-9.
26. Higgins JP, Altman DG. Chapter 8. Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies. In: Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2008:187-241.
27. Hammerschlag R, Milley R, Colbert A, et al. Randomized controlled trials of acupuncture (1997-2007): an assessment of reporting quality with a CONSORT-and STRICTA-based instrument. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2011;2011: pii: 183910.
28. Kim KH, Kang JW, Lee MS, et al. Assessment of the quality of reporting for treatment components in Cochrane Reviews of acupuncture. BMJ Open 2014;4:e004136.
29. Prady SL, Richmond SJ, Morton VM, et al. A systematic evaluation of the impact of STRICTA and CONSORT recommendations on quality of reporting for acupuncture trials. PLoS One 2008;3:e1577.
30. Ma B, Ke F, Zheng E, et al. Endorsement of the CONSORT statement by Chinese journals of Traditional Chinese Medicine: a survey of journal editors and review of journals' instructions for authors. Acupunct Med 2016;34:178-83.
31. Luo G, Lu L, Zeng J. Quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials of acupuncture for neurological diseases conducted in China. Acupunct Med 2014;32:411-17.
32. Lu L, Liao M, Zeng J, et al. Quality of reporting and its correlates among randomized controlled trials on acupuncture for cancer pain: application of the CONSORT 2010 Statement and STRICTA. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2013;13:489-98.
33. Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A, et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust 2006;185:263-7.
34. Oomens MA, Lazzari S, Heymans MW, et al. Association between funding, risk of bias, and outcome of randomised controlled trials in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2016;54:46-50.
35. McKibbon KA, Fridsma DB. Effectiveness of clinician-selected electronic information resources for answering primary care physicians' information needs. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006;13:653-9.
36. Mitchell JA, Aronson AR, Mork JG, et al. Gene indexing: characterization and analysis of NLM's GeneRIFs. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2003:460-4.
37. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration (4). Ann Intern Med 2001;134:663-94.