ArticleBMJ open2023
Reporting and data-sharing level of acupuncture randomised controlled trials: a cross-sectional study protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data sharing in acupuncture meta-analyses: Associations with journal policies and practical considerations.Integrative medicine research · 2026Article
- Exploration of registration and the risk of bias in acupuncture randomised controlled trials: a systematic review protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- An Acupuncture Protocol for the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction: A Delphi Process.Complementary medicine research · 2024Article
- Improving Delphi Process in Acupuncture Decision Making: Overall Descriptions and Quality Assessment of Delphi Reports.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) play an important role in evidence-based medicine. However, an article with low reporting quality may mislead both experts and the general public into an erroneous decision. Data sharing can contribute to the truthfulness and transparency of trials. Acupuncture RCTs have been increasing rapidly these years, but the reporting quality and data-sharing level of acupuncture RCTs are not clear. Thus, this study will provide the current status of the reporting quality and data-sharing level of acupuncture RCTs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cross-sectional study will be conducted. The seven databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CBM, CNKI, Wanfang Database and VIP will be searched between 1 January 2012 and 15 October 2022 to identify acupuncture RCTs. The basic characteristics of included trials will be summarised. The reporting quality for included RCTs will be assessed by the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials 2010 statement and the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture. The data-sharing level will be assessed by open science practices. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this study. This protocol has been registered in Open Science Framework Registries. The findings of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed academic journal.
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.