Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26801486›Full record

ReviewChinese journal of integrative medicine2016

Urgent need to improve the quality of case report in traditional Chinese medicine: Assessment on reporting quality of 3,417 cases.

Shu-Fei Fu, Wai Kun, Xiao-Xi Zeng, Li Zhang, Chung-Wah Cheng, Lisa Song, Linda Li-Dan Zhong, Jia Lin, Yong-Yan Wang, Hong-Cai Shang and 2 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Chinese journal of integrative medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. 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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Shu-Fei FuTianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Modern Chinese Medicine-Co-constructing State Key Laboratory Breading Base by Province and the Ministry, Tianjin, 300193, China.
Wai KunHong Kong Chinese Medicine Clinical Study Centre and School of Chinese Medicine, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Xiao-Xi ZengWest China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Li ZhangSecond Affiliated Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, 300150, China.
Chung-Wah ChengHong Kong Chinese Medicine Clinical Study Centre and School of Chinese Medicine, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Lisa SongHong Kong Chinese Medicine Clinical Study Centre and School of Chinese Medicine, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Linda Li-Dan ZhongHong Kong Chinese Medicine Clinical Study Centre and School of Chinese Medicine, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Jia LinTianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Modern Chinese Medicine-Co-constructing State Key Laboratory Breading Base by Province and the Ministry, Tianjin, 300193, China.
Yong-Yan WangChina Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100700, China.
Hong-Cai ShangTianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Modern Chinese Medicine-Co-constructing State Key Laboratory Breading Base by Province and the Ministry, Tianjin, 300193, China. shanghongcai@foxmail.com.
Zhao-Xia BianTianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Modern Chinese Medicine-Co-constructing State Key Laboratory Breading Base by Province and the Ministry, Tianjin, 300193, China. bzxiang@hkbu.edu.hk.
CARC Group
Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNHong Kong Baptist University · HK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo survey the reporting quality of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) case reports published in recent years and understand the common problems. The assessment results would lay the foundation for the development of recommendations for case report in Chinese medicine.

methodsThis survey determined the reporting quality of cases with Chinese herbal decoction, Chinese proprietary medicine, acupuncture, moxibustion and other traditional therapies published in 20 core medical journals of China by searching the China Academic Journals Full-text Database from 2006 to 2010. Fifty survey items in 16 domains were used to determine the reporting quality. One point was assigned to each item (Yes=1 point; No=0 point), and total score was 50 points. The domain of treatment was assessed independently, ranging from 2 to 9 items for different TCM interventions.

resultsThe total of 1,858 case reports, covering 3,417 cases were included to analyze from 13 out of 20 core medical journals of China. There were 74.8% of them did not identify the nature of study in title, while 73.9% did not comprise an abstract. Incomplete reporting was found in discussions/ comment, and only 38.9% had made recommendations or take-away messages. Figures and tables were infrequently used. Three cases cited the full names of patients, but without declaring that any consent was obtained. Over 90% reported the symptoms and signs of TCM, and characteristics on tongue and pulse, but less than 50% did mention other medical history and diagnostic rationale. More than 90% treatments of the included cases were herbal decoction, with clear reporting on the ingredients and dosages. However, the reporting rate of the dosages of each ingredient was just 48.4%. Almost none reported the quality control of crude herbs, manufacturers and lot numbers of herbal proprietary medicine. Besides, advices and precautions on diet, emotions and living were rare to be illustrated.

conclusionSystematic reporting recommendations are urged to develop for improving the contents and format of case reports in TCM.

Indexed as

Medicine, Chinese TraditionalQuality Assurance, Health CareHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CarePeriodicals as TopicResearch Reportcase reportquality assessmenttraditional Chinese medicine

Identifiers

PMID26801486
OpenAlexW2282171750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.