Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29649270›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

The quality of reporting in randomized controlled trials of acupuncture for knee osteoarthritis: A cross-sectional survey.

Pengli Jia, Li Tang, Jiajie Yu, Jiali Liu, Deying Kang, Xin Sun

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Pengli JiaChinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Li TangChinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Jiajie YuChinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Jiali LiuChinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Deying KangChinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Xin SunChinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6554-7088

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the reporting quality of acupuncture trials for knee osteoarthritis (KOA), and explore the factors associated with the reporting.

methodThree English and four Chinese databases were searched from inception to December 2016 for randomized control trials testing effects of acupuncture for knee osteoarthritis. We used the standard CONSORT (2010 version), CONSORT Extension for Non-Pharmacological Treatments, and STRICTA for measuring the quality of reporting. Using pre-specified study characteristics, we undertook regression analyses to examine factors associated with the reporting quality.

resultsA total of 318 RCT reports were included. For the standard CONSORT, ten items were substantially under-reported (reported in less than 5% of RCTs), including specification of important changes to methods after trial commencement (0.6%), description of any changes to trial outcomes (0.0%), implementation of interim analyses and stopping guidelines (0.6%), statement about why the trial ended or was stopped (1.6%), statement about the registration status (4.4%), accessibility of full trial protocol (4.7%), implementation of randomization (4.7%), description of the similarity of interventions (3.5%), conduct of ancillary analyses (3.8%) and presentation of methods for additional analyses (4.4%). Four of the STRICTA items were under-reported (reported in less than 10% of RCTs), including description of acupuncture style (8.5%), presentation of extent to which treatment varied (1.3%), statement of practitioner background (7.2%) and rationale for the control (9.1%). For CONSORT Extension, the reporting was poor across all items (reported in less than 10% of trials). Trials including authors with expertise in epidemiology or statistics, published in English, or enrolling patients from multiple centers were more likely to have better reporting.

conclusionsThe reporting in RCTs of acupuncture for KOA was generally poor. To improve the reporting quality, journals should encourage strict adherence to the reporting guidelines.

Indexed as

Acupuncture TherapyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurveys and QuestionnairesDatabases, FactualHumansOsteoarthritis, KneeQuality ControlResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID29649270
PMCPMC5896985

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.