SynthesisPloS one2013
Assessment of the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials on the treatment of diabetes mellitus with traditional chinese medicine: a systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interpretation of CIs in clinical trials with non-significant results: systematic review and recommendations.BMJ open · 2017Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials for the Treatment of Eczema with Chinese Patent Medicine Based on the CONSORT-CHM Formulas 2017.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020Article
- Does the medical literature remain inadequately described despite having reporting guidelines for 21 years? - A systematic review of reviews: an update.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2018Review
- Effects of the Tangningtongluo formula as an alternative strategy for diabetics via upregulation of insulin receptor substrate-1.Molecular medicine reports · 2017Article
- Meta-analysis of Huangqi injection for the adjunctive therapy of aplastic anemia.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAfter the publication of the CONSORT 2010 statement, few studies have been conducted to assess the reporting quality of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on treatment of diabetes mellitus with Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) published in Chinese journals.
objectiveTo investigate the current situation of the reporting quality of RCTs in leading medical journals in China with the CONSORT 2010 statement as criteria.
methodsThe China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) electronic database was searched for RCTs on the treatment of diabetes mellitus with TCM published in the Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional & Western Medicine, and the China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica from January to December 2011. We excluded trials reported as "animal studies", "in vitro studies", "case studies", or "systematic reviews". The CONSORT checklist was applied by two independent raters to evaluate the reporting quality of all eligible trials after discussing and comprehending the items thoroughly. Each item in the checklist was graded as either "yes" or "no" depending on whether it had been reported by the authors.
resultsWe identified 27 RCTs. According to the 37 items in the CONSORT checklist, the average reporting percentage was 45.0%, in which the average reporting percentage for the "title and abstract", the "introduction", the "methods", the "results", the "discussion" and the "other information" was 33.3%, 88.9%, 36.4%, 54.4%, 71.6% and 14.8%, respectively. In the Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional & Western Medicine, and the China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica the average reporting percentage was 42.2%, 56.8%, and 46.0%, respectively.
conclusionsThe reporting quality of RCTs in these three journals was insufficient to allow readers to assess the validity of the trials. We recommend that editors require authors to use the CONSORT statement when reporting their trial results as a condition of publication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.