ArticleBMJ open2019
Quality assessment of clinical trial registration with traditional Chinese medicine in WHO registries.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Problems with the outcome measures in randomized controlled trials of traditional Chinese medicine in treating chronic heart failure caused by coronary heart disease: a systematic review.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2021Pooled it
- Article
- Elevating traditional Chinese medicine in global health research: The case for Chinese herbal medicine formulas in mainstream therapeutics.Innovation (Cambridge (Mass.)) · 2025Review
- Research on the impact of traditional Chinese medicine registration innovation-oriented policies and enterprises performance: an empirical analysis based on listed enterprises in China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Exploration of registration and the risk of bias in acupuncture randomised controlled trials: a systematic review protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Registration and characteristics of clinical trials on traditional Chinese medicine and natural medicines for endometriosis: a comprehensive analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- The international clinical trials registry platform (ICTRP): data integrity and the trends in clinical trials, diseases, and drugs.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Quality assessment and its influencing factors of lung cancer clinical research registration: a cross-sectional analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Article
- Registration of intervention trials of Traditional Chinese Medicine for four neurological diseases on Chinese Clinical Trial Registry and ClinicalTrials.gov: a narrative review.Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan · 2022Review
- Registration quality and availability of publications for clinical trials in Germany and the influence of structural factors.PloS one · 2022Article
- Promotion of data sharing needs more than an emergency: An analysis of trends across clinical trials registered on the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.Wellcome open research · 2022Article
- Review
- Publication Rate and Consistency of Registered Trials of Motor-Based Stroke Rehabilitation.Neurology · 2021Article
- WHO Trial Registration Data Set (TRDS) extension for traditional Chinese medicine 2020: recommendations, explanation, and elaboration.BMC medical research methodology · 2020Article
- Chinese medicine diagnosis and treatment for COVID-2019: Is China ready for implementing a national guideline?Advances in integrative medicine · 2020Article
- Analysis of AYUSH studies registered in clinical trials registry of India from 2009 to 2020.Journal of Ayurveda and integrative medicineArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the registration quality of clinical trials (CTs) with traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and identify the common problems if any.
methodsThe ICTRP database was searched for all TCM CTs that were registered up to 31 December 2017. Registered information of each trial was collected from specific registry involved in ICTRP through hyperlink. The primary analysis was to assess the reporting quality of registered trials with TCM interventions, which is based on the minimum 20 items of WHO Trial Registration Data Set (TRDS, V.1.2.1) plus optional additional three items recommended by ICTRP, and some specific items for TCM information (including TCM intervention, diagnosis, outcome and rationale). Descriptive statistics were additionally used to analyse the baseline characteristics of TCM trial registrations.
resultsA total of 3339 records in 15 registries were examined. The number of TCM registered trials has increased rapidly after the requirement of mandatory trial registration proposed by International Committee of Medical Journal Editors on 1 July 2005, and the top two registries were Chinese Clinical Trial Registry and ClincialTrials.gov. Of 3339 trials, 61% were prospective registration and 12.8% shared resultant publications. There were 2955 interventional trials but none of them had a 100% reporting rate of the minimum 20 items and additional three items. The reporting quality of these 23 items was not optimal due to 11 of them had a lower reporting rate (<65%). For TCM details, 49.2% lacked information on description of TCM intervention(s), 85.9% did not contain TCM diagnosis criteria, 92.6% did not use TCM outcome(s) and 67.1% lacked information on TCM background and rationale.
conclusionThe registration quality of TCM CTs should be improved by prospective registration, full completion of WHO TRDS, full reporting of TCM information and results sharing. Further full set of trial registration items for TCM trials should be developed thus to standardise the content of TCM trial registration.
Indexed as
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.