Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25397774›Full record

ReviewPloS one2014

Reporting quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses of acupuncture.

Yali Liu, Rui Zhang, Jiao Huang, Xu Zhao, Danlu Liu, Wanting Sun, Yuefen Mai, Peng Zhang, Yajun Wang, Hua Cao and 1 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Yali LiuEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Clinical Translational Research and Evidence-Based Medicine of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China.
Rui ZhangEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; The First Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Jiao HuangEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; The First Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Xu ZhaoEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; The Second Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Danlu LiuEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Clinical Translational Research and Evidence-Based Medicine of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China; The First Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Wanting SunEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; The Second Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Yuefen MaiEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; The Second Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Peng ZhangEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Department of Cardiology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Ji'nan, Shandong Province, China.
Yajun WangAcupuncture and Massage College, Gansu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, China.
Hua CaoDepartment of Neurology, Gansu Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, China.
Ke hu YangEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Clinical Translational Research and Evidence-Based Medicine of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China; The First Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe QUOROM and PRISMA statements were published in 1999 and 2009, respectively, to improve the consistency of reporting systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) of clinical trials. However, not all SRs/MAs adhere completely to these important standards. In particular, it is not clear how well SRs/MAs of acupuncture studies adhere to reporting standards and which reporting criteria are generally ignored in these analyses.

objectivesTo evaluate reporting quality in SRs/MAs of acupuncture studies.

methodsWe performed a literature search for studies published prior to 2014 using the following public archives: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), the Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) database, the Chinese Journal Full-text Database (CJFD), the Chinese Scientific Journal Full-text Database (CSJD), and the Wanfang database. Data were extracted into pre-prepared Excel data-extraction forms. Reporting quality was assessed based on the PRISMA checklist (27 items).

resultsOf 476 appropriate SRs/MAs identified in our search, 203, 227, and 46 were published in Chinese journals, international journals, and the Cochrane Database, respectively. In 476 SRs/MAs, only 3 reported the information completely. By contrast, approximately 4.93% (1/203), 8.81% (2/227) and 0.00% (0/46) SRs/Mas reported less than 10 items in Chinese journals, international journals and CDSR, respectively. In general, the least frequently reported items (reported≤50%) in SRs/MAs were "protocol and registration", "risk of bias across studies", and "additional analyses" in both methods and results sections.

conclusionsSRs/MAs of acupuncture studies have not comprehensively reported information recommended in the PRISMA statement. Our study underscores that, in addition to focusing on careful study design and performance, attention should be paid to comprehensive reporting standards in SRs/MAs on acupuncture studies.

Indexed as

Acupuncture TherapyPublishingDatabases, FactualHumansMedicine, Chinese TraditionalMeta-Analysis as TopicSystematic Reviews as Topic

Identifiers

PMID25397774
PMCPMC4232579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.