ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2015
Effects of diagnostic errors in pattern differentiation and acupuncture prescription: a single-blinded, interrater agreement study.
Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Acupuncture Protocol for the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction: A Delphi Process.Complementary medicine research · 2024Article
- Diversity of Acupuncture Point Selections According to the Acupuncture Styles and Their Relations to Theoretical Elements in Traditional Asian Medicine: A Data-Mining-Based Literature Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Understanding Chinese Medicine Patterns of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Related Biomarkers.Medicines (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study compared the interrater agreement for pattern differentiation and acupoints prescription between two groups of human patients simulated with different diagnostic outcomes. Patients were simulated using a dataset about zangfu patterns and separated into groups (n = 30 each) according to the diagnostic outcome determined by a computational model. A questionnaire with 90 patients was delivered to 6 TCM experts (4-year minimal of clinic experience) who were asked to indicate a single pattern (among 73) and 8 acupoints (among 378). Interrater agreement was higher for pattern differentiation than for acupuncture prescription. Interrater agreement on pattern differentiation was slight for both groups with correct (Light's κ = 0.167, 95% CI = [0.108; 0.254]) and incorrect diagnosis (Light's κ = 0.190, 95% CI = [0.120; 0.286]). Interrater agreement on acupuncture prescription was slight for both groups of correct (ι = 0.029, 95% CI = [0.015; 0.057]) and incorrect diagnosis (ι = 0.040, 95% CI = [0.023; 0.058], P = 0.075). Diagnostic performance of raters yielded the following: accuracy = 60.9%, sensitivity = 21.7%, and specificity = 100%. An overall improvement in the interrater agreement and diagnostic accuracy was observed when the data were analyzed using the internal systems instead of the pattern's labels.
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.