Skip to main content

Languages

The Study of Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials in Systematic Reviews of Acupuncture

Date and Location

Session: 

P3.005

Date

Sunday 22 September 2013 - 10:30 - 12:00

Location

Presenting author and contact person

Presenting author

Yali Liu

Contact person

Kehu Yang
Abstract text
Background:The reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is one of the factors during developing a systematic review (SRs)/meta-analysis(MAs). It is significant to know which information was ignored by reviewers in RCTs which were included in SRs/MAs. Objectives: To evaluate the reporting quality of RCT in SRs/MAs of acupuncture. Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), the Chinese Biomedicine Literature Database(CBM), Traditional Chinese Medicine database (TCM database), Chinese Journal Full-text Database (CJFD), Chinese Scientific Journal Full-text Database (CSJD) and Wanfang Database, until Dec 2011. The RCTs in English and Chinese were identified from those SRs/MAs. The random samples were selected from these RCTs in 2001-2010. Data was extracted into excel spreadsheets according to pre-prepared data extracted forms. The reporting quality was assessed based on CONSORT (27 items) and STRICTA checklists (17 items) statements by two reviewers, respectively. Results:A total number of 327 SRs/MAs of Acupuncture & Moxibustion and a random sample of 363 RCTs were identified and selected in this study. It showed that the reporting quality of 363 Chinese and English RCTs of acupuncture was poor. The scores of CONSORT of RCTs in 2006-2010 were higher in English than in Chinese (P =0.000). However, scores of STRICTA in 2006-2010 of English RCTs were similar to Chinese RCTs (P =0.440). Compared with these in 2001-2005, scores of CONSORT in 2006-2010 were significantly higher than in both English (P =0.011) and Chinese RCTs (P=0.001). Besides, scores of STRICTA in both English (P=0.317) and Chinese RCTs (P =0.853) in 2006-2010 were similar to RCTs in 2001-2010. Conclusions:The RCTs from the SRs/MAs of acupuncture have not comprehensive reporting of relevant information based on CONSORT and STRICTA statements. The researchers should be pay attention to comprehensive report of RCTs on acupuncture.