SynthesisJournal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)2019
Reporting of Protocol Rationale and Content Validity in Randomized Clinical Trials of T'ai Chi: A Systematic Evaluation.
Synthesis in Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are Tai Chi and Qigong effective in the treatment of traumatic brain injury? A systematic review.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2024Pooled it
- The Science of Tai Chi and Qigong as Whole Person Health-Part II: Evidence Gaps and Opportunities for Future Research and Implementation.Journal of integrative and complementary medicine · 2025Review
- CommunityJournal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMind-body exercise interventions are typically multimodal, complex, and pluralistic, and few have been developed with the goal of therapeutically targeting a specific medical population. It is thus important that clinical trials evaluating mind-body interventions provide some justification for the use of the specific protocol being evaluated.
objectivesThis article reports the results of a systematic review of the quality of reporting of protocol rationale and content validity for using a specific t'ai chi protocol in a randomized controlled trial (RCT).
methodsElectronic literature searches were conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, EBSCOhost, and the Cochrane Library from inception through June 2015. Search terms were Tai Chi, Taiji, Tai Chi Chuan; searches were limited to English-language RCTs. Inclusion and exclusion of trials were reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The authors assessed the level of reporting with respect to t'ai chi protocol validation using a 5-point grading system based on whether (1) a specific protocol was mentioned, (2) rationale for the specific protocol was stated and supported, and (3) formal evaluation for content validity was conducted.
resultsThere was significant heterogeneity in the quality of reporting related to protocol rationale and content validity. A total of 171 publications were identified. Studies met between 0 and 4 validity criteria (of possible 5, more indicating better quality), with a mean of 2.52 (±SD 1.2) and median of 3. Twenty (12%) trials did not mention a specific t'ai chi protocol, 10 (6%) trials met 0 of 5 criteria, and 47 (31%) studies met 4 of 5 criteria. Formal validity assessments were employed in only one trial.
conclusionsThe poor quality of protocol rationale and content validity reporting limits our ability to accurately evaluate the evidence of t'ai chi as a therapeutic intervention. The development of formal guidelines for developing and reporting intervention validity for multimodal mind-body exercises like t'ai chi may improve the quality and interpretability of research.
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.