Cargando…

Methodological and reporting quality evaluation of meta-analyses on the Chinese herbal preparation Zheng Qing Feng Tong Ning for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND: Zheng Qing Feng Tong Ning (ZQFTN) is a sinomenine (SIN) preparation that has been used in clinical practice. Our study aimed to assess the methodological and reporting quality of meta-analyses on the Chinese herbal formula ZQFTN for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Sy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liang, Mingge, Yan, Lan, Mei, Zhigang, Luo, Yanan, Hou, Xiaoqiang, Feng, Zhitao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7318442/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32586308
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12906-020-02978-5
_version_ 1783550851650945024
author Liang, Mingge
Yan, Lan
Mei, Zhigang
Luo, Yanan
Hou, Xiaoqiang
Feng, Zhitao
author_facet Liang, Mingge
Yan, Lan
Mei, Zhigang
Luo, Yanan
Hou, Xiaoqiang
Feng, Zhitao
author_sort Liang, Mingge
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Zheng Qing Feng Tong Ning (ZQFTN) is a sinomenine (SIN) preparation that has been used in clinical practice. Our study aimed to assess the methodological and reporting quality of meta-analyses on the Chinese herbal formula ZQFTN for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Systematic searches were carried out with the 5 following electronic databases from inception to July 2019: China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, VIP database for Chinese technical periodicals (VIP), Cochrane Library and PubMed. The quality of the methodology and reporting was measured with the assessment of multiple systematic reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) scale, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS: Eight studies were identified. Among the 16 items of the AMSTAR 2 scale, four items were optimally reported (“Y” =100% of the items), and another four items were poorly reported (“Y” =0% of the items). Only 2 studies received a good overall score (“Y” ≥50% of the items). Regarding the PRISMA statement, the scores of 5 studies were lower than the average score (17.69), indicating that the quality of the reports was very low. In terms of the GRADE, none of the 61 results were of high quality (0.0%). Fifteen results were of medium quality (25%), 34 were of low quality (55%), and 12 were of very low quality (20%). Among the five downgrading factors, deviation risk (n = 61, 100%) was the most common downgrading factor, followed by inconsistency (n = 30, 50%), publication bias (n = 17, 28%), inaccuracy (n = 11, 18%) and indirectness (n = 0, 0%). CONCLUSIONS: The methodological and reporting quality of the meta-analyses and systematic reviews in the included studies are less than optimal, and researchers should undergo additional training and follow the AMSTAR 2 scale, PRISMA statement and GRADE to design high-quality studies in the future.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7318442
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73184422020-06-29 Methodological and reporting quality evaluation of meta-analyses on the Chinese herbal preparation Zheng Qing Feng Tong Ning for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis Liang, Mingge Yan, Lan Mei, Zhigang Luo, Yanan Hou, Xiaoqiang Feng, Zhitao BMC Complement Med Ther Research Article BACKGROUND: Zheng Qing Feng Tong Ning (ZQFTN) is a sinomenine (SIN) preparation that has been used in clinical practice. Our study aimed to assess the methodological and reporting quality of meta-analyses on the Chinese herbal formula ZQFTN for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Systematic searches were carried out with the 5 following electronic databases from inception to July 2019: China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, VIP database for Chinese technical periodicals (VIP), Cochrane Library and PubMed. The quality of the methodology and reporting was measured with the assessment of multiple systematic reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) scale, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS: Eight studies were identified. Among the 16 items of the AMSTAR 2 scale, four items were optimally reported (“Y” =100% of the items), and another four items were poorly reported (“Y” =0% of the items). Only 2 studies received a good overall score (“Y” ≥50% of the items). Regarding the PRISMA statement, the scores of 5 studies were lower than the average score (17.69), indicating that the quality of the reports was very low. In terms of the GRADE, none of the 61 results were of high quality (0.0%). Fifteen results were of medium quality (25%), 34 were of low quality (55%), and 12 were of very low quality (20%). Among the five downgrading factors, deviation risk (n = 61, 100%) was the most common downgrading factor, followed by inconsistency (n = 30, 50%), publication bias (n = 17, 28%), inaccuracy (n = 11, 18%) and indirectness (n = 0, 0%). CONCLUSIONS: The methodological and reporting quality of the meta-analyses and systematic reviews in the included studies are less than optimal, and researchers should undergo additional training and follow the AMSTAR 2 scale, PRISMA statement and GRADE to design high-quality studies in the future. BioMed Central 2020-06-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7318442/ /pubmed/32586308 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12906-020-02978-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Liang, Mingge
Yan, Lan
Mei, Zhigang
Luo, Yanan
Hou, Xiaoqiang
Feng, Zhitao
Methodological and reporting quality evaluation of meta-analyses on the Chinese herbal preparation Zheng Qing Feng Tong Ning for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis
title Methodological and reporting quality evaluation of meta-analyses on the Chinese herbal preparation Zheng Qing Feng Tong Ning for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis
title_full Methodological and reporting quality evaluation of meta-analyses on the Chinese herbal preparation Zheng Qing Feng Tong Ning for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis
title_fullStr Methodological and reporting quality evaluation of meta-analyses on the Chinese herbal preparation Zheng Qing Feng Tong Ning for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis
title_full_unstemmed Methodological and reporting quality evaluation of meta-analyses on the Chinese herbal preparation Zheng Qing Feng Tong Ning for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis
title_short Methodological and reporting quality evaluation of meta-analyses on the Chinese herbal preparation Zheng Qing Feng Tong Ning for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis
title_sort methodological and reporting quality evaluation of meta-analyses on the chinese herbal preparation zheng qing feng tong ning for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7318442/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32586308
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12906-020-02978-5
work_keys_str_mv AT liangmingge methodologicalandreportingqualityevaluationofmetaanalysesonthechineseherbalpreparationzhengqingfengtongningforthetreatmentofrheumatoidarthritis
AT yanlan methodologicalandreportingqualityevaluationofmetaanalysesonthechineseherbalpreparationzhengqingfengtongningforthetreatmentofrheumatoidarthritis
AT meizhigang methodologicalandreportingqualityevaluationofmetaanalysesonthechineseherbalpreparationzhengqingfengtongningforthetreatmentofrheumatoidarthritis
AT luoyanan methodologicalandreportingqualityevaluationofmetaanalysesonthechineseherbalpreparationzhengqingfengtongningforthetreatmentofrheumatoidarthritis
AT houxiaoqiang methodologicalandreportingqualityevaluationofmetaanalysesonthechineseherbalpreparationzhengqingfengtongningforthetreatmentofrheumatoidarthritis
AT fengzhitao methodologicalandreportingqualityevaluationofmetaanalysesonthechineseherbalpreparationzhengqingfengtongningforthetreatmentofrheumatoidarthritis