Cargando…
Assessment of the quality of reporting for treatment components in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture
OBJECTIVES: High-quality reporting of treatment details can aid replication of study results in real-world clinical practice. The Standards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) is a reporting guideline for key elements of acupuncture interventions in clinical trial...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3902460/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24441055 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004136 |
_version_ | 1782300987725185024 |
---|---|
author | Kim, Kun Hyung Kang, Jung Won Lee, Myeong Soo Lee, Jae-Dong |
author_facet | Kim, Kun Hyung Kang, Jung Won Lee, Myeong Soo Lee, Jae-Dong |
author_sort | Kim, Kun Hyung |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: High-quality reporting of treatment details can aid replication of study results in real-world clinical practice. The Standards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) is a reporting guideline for key elements of acupuncture interventions in clinical trials. This study used STRICTA to investigate whether Cochrane reviews of acupuncture adequately report important treatment details. DESIGN: Systematic review METHODS: Cochrane reviews of acupuncture were identified from The Cochrane Library (issue 7, 2012). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) included in the reviews and published after 2005 were obtained. Using STRICTA, we extracted acupuncture-related information from the Cochrane reviews and the RCTs. The characteristics of the included studies’ table were the major source of intervention information from Cochrane reviews. Reporting quality of acupuncture interventions in Cochrane reviews was assessed and compared with the respective RCTs. RESULTS: 25 Cochrane reviews of acupuncture and 92 RCTs met the selection criteria. Cochrane reviews were 16% less likely to report the acupuncture-related items of STRICTA than RCTs (risk ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.88, I(2)=8%). Information was significantly better reported for 10 of the 15 treatment-group items of STRICTA in RCTs than in Cochrane reviews (p<0.05), while four items did so without statistical significance. One item related to practitioner background was significantly better reported in Cochrane reviews. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting quality of treatment details in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture was insufficient with regard to STRICTA, even though such information was readily reported in RCTs. The overall quality of reporting of the RCTs, while better than the reviews, was also often suboptimal. Use of STRICTA guideline during the review process is recommended to adequately report the key treatment components in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture. The potential impact of STRICTA to the replicability and utilisation of reviews in future research and practice needs to be investigated. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3902460 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-39024602014-01-27 Assessment of the quality of reporting for treatment components in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture Kim, Kun Hyung Kang, Jung Won Lee, Myeong Soo Lee, Jae-Dong BMJ Open Complementary Medicine OBJECTIVES: High-quality reporting of treatment details can aid replication of study results in real-world clinical practice. The Standards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) is a reporting guideline for key elements of acupuncture interventions in clinical trials. This study used STRICTA to investigate whether Cochrane reviews of acupuncture adequately report important treatment details. DESIGN: Systematic review METHODS: Cochrane reviews of acupuncture were identified from The Cochrane Library (issue 7, 2012). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) included in the reviews and published after 2005 were obtained. Using STRICTA, we extracted acupuncture-related information from the Cochrane reviews and the RCTs. The characteristics of the included studies’ table were the major source of intervention information from Cochrane reviews. Reporting quality of acupuncture interventions in Cochrane reviews was assessed and compared with the respective RCTs. RESULTS: 25 Cochrane reviews of acupuncture and 92 RCTs met the selection criteria. Cochrane reviews were 16% less likely to report the acupuncture-related items of STRICTA than RCTs (risk ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.88, I(2)=8%). Information was significantly better reported for 10 of the 15 treatment-group items of STRICTA in RCTs than in Cochrane reviews (p<0.05), while four items did so without statistical significance. One item related to practitioner background was significantly better reported in Cochrane reviews. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting quality of treatment details in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture was insufficient with regard to STRICTA, even though such information was readily reported in RCTs. The overall quality of reporting of the RCTs, while better than the reviews, was also often suboptimal. Use of STRICTA guideline during the review process is recommended to adequately report the key treatment components in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture. The potential impact of STRICTA to the replicability and utilisation of reviews in future research and practice needs to be investigated. BMJ Publishing Group 2014-01-17 /pmc/articles/PMC3902460/ /pubmed/24441055 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004136 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ |
spellingShingle | Complementary Medicine Kim, Kun Hyung Kang, Jung Won Lee, Myeong Soo Lee, Jae-Dong Assessment of the quality of reporting for treatment components in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture |
title | Assessment of the quality of reporting for treatment components in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture |
title_full | Assessment of the quality of reporting for treatment components in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture |
title_fullStr | Assessment of the quality of reporting for treatment components in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessment of the quality of reporting for treatment components in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture |
title_short | Assessment of the quality of reporting for treatment components in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture |
title_sort | assessment of the quality of reporting for treatment components in cochrane reviews of acupuncture |
topic | Complementary Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3902460/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24441055 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004136 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kimkunhyung assessmentofthequalityofreportingfortreatmentcomponentsincochranereviewsofacupuncture AT kangjungwon assessmentofthequalityofreportingfortreatmentcomponentsincochranereviewsofacupuncture AT leemyeongsoo assessmentofthequalityofreportingfortreatmentcomponentsincochranereviewsofacupuncture AT leejaedong assessmentofthequalityofreportingfortreatmentcomponentsincochranereviewsofacupuncture |