ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2020
Pilot and feasibility trials in traditional Chinese medicine: a literature review of current practice.
Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe guidelines for pilot and feasibility studies were published in 2016. Little is known about the guideline adherence of TCM (traditional Chinese medicine) pilot trials or whether the guidelines can significantly enhance the quality of implementation and reporting of TCM pilot trials. We aimed to investigate the guideline adherence, assess the impact of guidelines on TCM pilot trials, and discuss potential challenges specific to TCM pilot trials, by conducting a literature review.
methodsWe systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CNKI to retrieve TCM pilot trials. We randomly chose 50 pilot trials from the eligible studies for analyses. The CONSORT extension to pilot and feasibility studies was used as a framework to assess the methodology and reporting quality of the studies.
resultsThe included studies had a guideline adherence level ranging from 4 to 96%, where the lowest adherence was found in the item 6c (prespecified criteria used to judge progression to future definitive trial). The guidance published in 2016 seemed to exert minimal effect on guideline adherence in TCM pilot trials. The unidentified issues related to TCM pilot trials from the guidelines included blinding, lack of standard formula of interventions, difficulty in comparison for effect assessment of interventions, and difficulty in bias control.
conclusionsThe current practice in TCM pilot trials required substantial improvement in the literature. Further endeavors are needed for training and dissemination of guideline adherence, and development of more detailed methodology in the field of TCM pilot trials.
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.