Cargando…
The quality of Cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview
BACKGROUND: Many systematic reviews of clinical trials on acupuncture were performed within the Cochrane Collaboration, the evidence-based medicine (EBM) most recognized organization. Objective of the article was to systematically collect and identify systematic reviews of acupuncture published in t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7556594/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33054785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12906-020-03099-9 |
_version_ | 1783594252683444224 |
---|---|
author | Ji, Zhaochen Zhang, Junhua Menniti-Ippolito, Francesca Massari, Marco Fauci, Alice Josephine Li, Na Yang, Fengwen Zhang, Mingyan |
author_facet | Ji, Zhaochen Zhang, Junhua Menniti-Ippolito, Francesca Massari, Marco Fauci, Alice Josephine Li, Na Yang, Fengwen Zhang, Mingyan |
author_sort | Ji, Zhaochen |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Many systematic reviews of clinical trials on acupuncture were performed within the Cochrane Collaboration, the evidence-based medicine (EBM) most recognized organization. Objective of the article was to systematically collect and identify systematic reviews of acupuncture published in the Cochrane Library and assess their quality from a methodological perspective. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify the reviews of acupuncture conducted until June 2019. The methodological quality of the included reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 checklist, an evaluation tool for systematic reviews. RESULTS: Out of a total of 126 eligible reviews, 50 systematic reviews were included. According to the AMSTAR 2, 52% of Cochrane Systematic Reviews (CSRs) were of low quality, due to the presence of one or more weaknesses in at least one of the domains defined as critical for the methodological quality assessment. The less satisfied critical domain was inadequate investigation and discussion of publication bias. Declaration of potential sources of conflict of interest, and funding of the authors of the review and of the included studies were other important weaknesses. CONCLUSIONS: The main methodological flaws in the included CSRs were related to topics of relatively new concern in the conduction of systematic reviews of the literature. However, both, lack of attention about retrieval of negative studies, and statements about conflict of interests are crucial point for the evaluation of therapeutic interventions according to EBM methodology. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7556594 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75565942020-10-15 The quality of Cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview Ji, Zhaochen Zhang, Junhua Menniti-Ippolito, Francesca Massari, Marco Fauci, Alice Josephine Li, Na Yang, Fengwen Zhang, Mingyan BMC Complement Med Ther Research Article BACKGROUND: Many systematic reviews of clinical trials on acupuncture were performed within the Cochrane Collaboration, the evidence-based medicine (EBM) most recognized organization. Objective of the article was to systematically collect and identify systematic reviews of acupuncture published in the Cochrane Library and assess their quality from a methodological perspective. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify the reviews of acupuncture conducted until June 2019. The methodological quality of the included reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 checklist, an evaluation tool for systematic reviews. RESULTS: Out of a total of 126 eligible reviews, 50 systematic reviews were included. According to the AMSTAR 2, 52% of Cochrane Systematic Reviews (CSRs) were of low quality, due to the presence of one or more weaknesses in at least one of the domains defined as critical for the methodological quality assessment. The less satisfied critical domain was inadequate investigation and discussion of publication bias. Declaration of potential sources of conflict of interest, and funding of the authors of the review and of the included studies were other important weaknesses. CONCLUSIONS: The main methodological flaws in the included CSRs were related to topics of relatively new concern in the conduction of systematic reviews of the literature. However, both, lack of attention about retrieval of negative studies, and statements about conflict of interests are crucial point for the evaluation of therapeutic interventions according to EBM methodology. BioMed Central 2020-10-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7556594/ /pubmed/33054785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12906-020-03099-9 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 Ji, Zhaochen Zhang, Junhua Menniti-Ippolito, Francesca Massari, Marco Fauci, Alice Josephine Li, Na Yang, Fengwen Zhang, Mingyan The quality of Cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview |
title | The quality of Cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview |
title_full | The quality of Cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview |
title_fullStr | The quality of Cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview |
title_full_unstemmed | The quality of Cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview |
title_short | The quality of Cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview |
title_sort | quality of cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7556594/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33054785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12906-020-03099-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jizhaochen thequalityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT zhangjunhua thequalityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT mennitiippolitofrancesca thequalityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT massarimarco thequalityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT faucialicejosephine thequalityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT lina thequalityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT yangfengwen thequalityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT zhangmingyan thequalityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT jizhaochen qualityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT zhangjunhua qualityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT mennitiippolitofrancesca qualityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT massarimarco qualityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT faucialicejosephine qualityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT lina qualityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT yangfengwen qualityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview AT zhangmingyan qualityofcochranesystematicreviewsofacupunctureanoverview |