Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27048411›Full record

ArticleChinese journal of integrative medicine2017

Impact evaluation of CONSORT and STRICTA guidelines on reporting quality for randomized controlled trials of acupuncture conducted in China.

Li-Ming Lu, Jun He, Jing-Chun Zeng, Mu-Xi Liao, Chao Jia, Hai-Hua Pan

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Chinese journal of integrative medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Acupuncture for cancer-related fatigue in lung cancer patients: a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled pilot trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Li-Ming LuKey Unit of Methodology in Clinical Research, Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Jun HeDepartment of Acupuncture, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510405, China. hejunjun11@126.com.
Jing-Chun ZengDepartment of Acupuncture, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510405, China.
Mu-Xi LiaoDepartment of Acupuncture, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510405, China.
Chao JiaDepartment of Acupuncture, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510405, China.
Hai-Hua PanDepartment of Acupuncture, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510405, China.
Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate and compare the reports' qualities of acupuncture randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in China before and after the implementation of two guidelines, i.e., the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement and the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA).

methodsProportions of studies that reported CONSORT and STRICTA items were compared for the years before and after implementation of these two guidelines. In addition, the total score of each item's reporting were calculated and reported differences during different date ranges were compared.

resultsFor CONSORT items (maximum score 8), there was evidence of a slight improvement in reporting between 1994-1995 and 1999-2000 combined (2.5±0.6) and 2004-2005 and 2009-2010 combined (3.0±0.9; difference 0.4, 95% confidence interval, 0.3 to 0.6, P<0.01). For STRICTA items (maximum score 17), there was evidence that a slight improvement in reporting between 1994-1995 and 1999-2000 combined (8.6±2.1) and 2004-2005 and 2009-2010 combined (10.1±1.8; difference 1.5, 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 1.9, P<0.01).

conclusionQuality of reporting for RCTs of acupuncture treatment conducted in China have generally improved since the introduction of the STRICTA and CONSORT guidelines.

Indexed as

Guidelines as TopicResearch ReportChinaHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTime FactorsacupunctureConsolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statementquality of reportingrandomized controlled trialsStandards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA)

Identifiers

PMID27048411
OpenAlexW2315670380

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.