ReviewJournal of pain research2021
Evaluating the Quality of Reports About Randomized Controlled Trials of Acupuncture for Low Back Pain.
Review in Journal of pain research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Overall reporting quality of randomised controlled trials of acupuncture for low back pain reported after 2020: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2025Pooled it
- Reporting characteristics and quality of randomized controlled trial protocols in traditional Chinese medicine: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Pooled it
- The global prevalence of low back pain in pregnancy: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- Article
- Reporting and data-sharing level of acupuncture randomised controlled trials: a cross-sectional study protocol.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Efficacy of manual acupuncture vs. placebo acupuncture for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) in perimenopausal women: a randomized, single-blinded controlled trial.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Knowledge Mapping Analysis of International Research on Acupuncture for Low Back Pain Using Bibliometrics.Journal of pain research · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to improve the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by evaluating RCTs of acupuncture for low back pain (LBP) based on the CONSORT and STRICTA statements.
methodsLiterature from the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, Ovid, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang database, and Chongqing Weipu (VIP) was systematically searched from 2010 to 2020. The general characteristics and the overall quality score (OQS) of the literature were evaluated by two investigators. The agreement between investigators was calculated using Cohen's kappa statistics.
resultsA total of 31 RCTs were extracted in the final analysis. Based on the CONSORT statement, the items "title and abstract", "background and objectives", "intervention", "outcomes", "statistical methods", "baseline data", "outcomes and estimation" and "interpretation" have a positive rate of greater than 80%. The items "implementation", "generalizability" and "protocol" have a positive rate of less than 30%. Based on the STRICTA statement, the items "style of acupuncture", "needle retention time", "number of treatment sessions", "frequency and duration of treatment" and "precise description of the control or comparator" have a positive rate of greater than 80%. The item "extent to which the treatment was varied" has a positive rate of less than 30%. The agreements among most items are determined to be moderate or good.
conclusionThe reporting quality of RCTs of acupuncture for LBP is moderate. Researchers should rigidly follow the CONSORT and STRICTA statements to enhance the quality of their studies.
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.