Dataset Information

The quality of Cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview.

ABSTRACT:

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.

SUBMITTER: Ji Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7556594 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Sedentary lifestyle is a major risk factor for noncommunicable diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, cancer and diabetes. It has been estimated that approximately 3.2 million deaths each year are attributable to insufficient levels of physical activity. We evaluated the available evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs) on the effectiveness of exercise/physical activity for various health outcomes. Methods Overview and meta-analysis. The Cochrane Library was searched from 01.01.2000 to issue 1, 2019. No language restrictions were imposed. Only CSRs of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Both healthy individuals, those at risk of a disease, and medically compromised patients of any age and gender were eligible. We evaluated any type of exercise or physical activity interventions; against any types of controls; and measuring any type of health-related outcome measures. The AMSTAR-2 tool for assessing the methodological quality of the included studies was utilised. Results Hundred and fifty CSRs met the inclusion criteria. There were 54 different conditions. Majority of CSRs were of high methodological quality. Hundred and thirty CSRs employed meta-analytic techniques and 20 did not. Limitations for studies were the most common reasons for downgrading the quality of the evidence. Based on 10 CSRs and 187 RCTs with 27,671 participants, there was a 13% reduction in mortality rates risk ratio (RR) 0.87 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.78 to 0.96]; I2 =?26.6%, [prediction interval (PI) 0.70, 1.07], median effect size (MES)?=?0.93 [interquartile range (IQR) 0.81, 1.00]. Data from 15 CSRs and 408 RCTs with 32,984 participants showed a small improvement in quality of life (QOL) standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.18 [95% CI 0.08, 0.28]; I2 =?74.3%; PI -0.18, 0.53], MES?=?0.20 [IQR 0.07, 0.39]. Subgroup analyses by the type of condition showed that the magnitude of effect size was the largest among patients with mental health conditions. Conclusion There is a plethora of CSRs evaluating the effectiveness of physical activity/exercise. The evidence suggests that physical activity/exercise reduces mortality rates and improves QOL with minimal or no safety concerns. Trial registration Registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019120295) on 10th January 2019. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-020-09855-3.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral factors are associated with an increased risk of preterm birth (PTB); therefore, various interventions might have the potential to influence it. Due to the large number of interventions that address PTB, the objective of this overview is to summarise evidence from Cochrane reviews regarding the effects and safety of these different interventions.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature search in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Included reviews should be based on randomised controlled trials comparing antenatal non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions that directly or indirectly address PTB with placebo/no treatment or routine care in pregnant women at less than 37 completed weeks of gestation without signs of threatened preterm labour. We considered PTB at less than 37 completed weeks of gestation as the primary outcome.ResultsWe included 56 Cochrane systematic reviews. Three interventions increased PTB risk significantly. Twelve interventions led to a statistically significant lower incidence of PTBs. However, this reduction was mostly observed in defined at-risk subgroups of pregnant women. The remaining antenatal interventions failed to prove a significant effect on PTB?<?37 weeks, but some of them at least showed a positive effect in secondary outcomes (e.g., reduction in early PTBs). As an unintended result of this review, we identified 28 additional Cochrane reviews which intended to report on PTB?<?37 weeks, but were not able to find any RCTs reporting appropriate data.ConclusionsThe possible effects of a diverse range of interventions on PTB have been evaluated in Cochrane systematic reviews. Few interventions have been demonstrated to be effective and a small number have been found to be harmful. For around half of the interventions evaluated, the Cochrane review concluded that there was insufficient evidence to provide sound recommendations for clinical practice. No RCT evidence is available for a number of potentially relevant interventions.

Project description:ObjectivesHigh-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.DesignSystematic reviewMethodsCochrane 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.Results25 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.ConclusionsReporting 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.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Eczema is the most common inflammatory skin disease of childhood, characterized by an itchy red rash that usually involves the face and skin folds. There is currently no curative treatment for eczema, so the reduction of eczema incidence through disease prevention is a desirable goal. Potential interventions for preventing eczema include exclusive breastfeeding, hydrolysed protein formulas and soy formulas when bottle feeding, maternal antigen avoidance, omega oil supplementation, prebiotics and probiotics. OBJECTIVES: This overview of reviews aims to present the current body of data from Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews to provide the most up-to-date evidence on the efficacy and safety of interventions to prevent eczema in infants and children at different risk levels for developing allergic disease. METHODS: Our pool of Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews came from the 2010 United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) Evidence Skin Disorders Annual Evidence Updates Mapping Exercise on Atopic Eczema. This group used a comprehensive search strategy last conducted in August 2010 to identify all systematic reviews on eczema prevention. We identified all reviews that met our pre-specified inclusion criteria, and data were extracted, analysed, compiled into tables and synthesized using quantitative and qualitative methods. MAIN RESULTS: Seven systematic reviews containing 39 relevant trials with 11 897 participants were included in this overview. Overall, there was no clear evidence that any of the main interventions reviewed reduced eczema incidence. In subgroup analyses of infants at high risk of allergic disease, an observational study found that exclusive breastfeeding for at least six months compared with introduction of solids at three to six months decreased the incidence of eczema by 60% (risk ratio (RR): 0.40; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.21, 0.78), and a randomized controlled trial found that prebiotics compared with no prebiotics decreased incidence by 58% (RR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.21, 0.84). However, each of these findings was based on the results of a single small trial, and no intervention reduced eczema incidence beyond the first two years of life. Although we pre-specified incidence of atopic eczema (i.e. eczema associated with immunoglobulin E (IgE) sensitization) as a primary outcome, data on whether participants diagnosed with eczema were truly atopic were largely lacking from systematic reviews. Similarly, data on atopy, measured using skin prick tests or specific IgE tests to allergens, were not reported in many reviews. No interventions were found to decrease atopy when reported. Adverse events data were generally lacking, but data from a trial of probiotics versus no probiotics showed significantly more spitting up in the first one (RR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.03, 3.45) and two (RR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.02, 2.80) months of life, but no overall increase in risk of gastrointestinal symptoms in the first year. AUTHORS#ENTITYSTARTX02019; CONCLUSIONS: Although there is currently no clear evidence showing that any of the interventions examined in this overview prevent eczema in participants not selected for risk of allergic disease, there is some evidence that exclusive breastfeeding for at least six months and prebiotics might reduce eczema incidence in high-risk participants. However, these conclusions are based on limited evidence with methodological shortcomings. Future research on prevention of eczema is needed and should examine different types of hydrolysed formulas, prebiotics and probiotics, as well as enhancement of the skin barrier and other novel approaches in infants at different risk levels for developing allergic disease.

Project description:BackgroundTo date, several systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) on the topic of acupuncture as a treatment for diabetic gastroparesis (DGP) have been published. However, whether acupuncture is an effective and safe treatment for DGP remains controversial. In this study, we aimed to determine whether the methodology and results of previously published SRs/MAs of acupuncture as a treatment for DGP were of sufficient quality to be considered reliable.MethodsWe extensively searched seven databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge, Wan Fang, and Chongqing VIP, for SRs/MAs published before or on September 16, 2022. The SRs/MAs that met the inclusion criteria were evaluated for the quality of the methodology and results using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews Two (AMSTAR-2) and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tools. A re-meta-analysis of primary outcome indicators was also performed.ResultsTen SRs/MAs that met the inclusion criteria were obtained. Using the AMSTAR-2, which is a methodological quality assessment tool, two MAs were rated as low quality, and eight SRs/MAs were rated as extremely low quality. Assessment with the GRADE tool revealed that, among 20 results, 4 were of moderate quality, 10 were of low quality, and 6 were of very low quality. Re-meta-analysis of primary outcome indicators revealed that, in terms of total efficiency, all types of acupuncture interventions, such as acupuncture, electroacupuncture, and acupoint injection, performed better than the controls, such as gastroprokinetic agents and sham acupuncture. Moreover, in the treatment of DGP, acupuncture exhibited fewer side effects compared to the controls.ConclusionAcupuncture appears to improve the symptoms of patients with DGP, and the side effects of acupuncture as a treatment for DGP are inferior to those of the controls. However, owing to the low quality of the methodology and results of the SRs/MAs, these findings cannot be considered reliable and need to be validated by additional studies with rigorous standards of experimental design and protocols and larger sample sizes.

Project description:BackgroundChinese herbal medicines (CHMs) are the major interventions of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), which are typically administered as either single herbs or formulas. The Cochrane systematic reviews (SRs) of CHMs are essential references for evaluating the efficacy and safety of CHMs interventions; they are expected to be accurate and reliable. This study aimed to assess the reporting quality of these SRs, particularly whether necessary information related to CHM was adequately reported.MethodsThe Cochrane Database was systematically searched for all SRs of CHM that were published up to 31 December 2017. The primary analysis was to assess their reporting quality based on 27-item of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and 9-item of CHM-related information designed according to TCM theory. Descriptive statistics were additionally used to analyze their baseline characteristics.ResultsA total of 109 Cochrane SRs of CHM were identified from 1999 to 2017. For 27-item of PRISMA, 26 had the reporting compliances higher than 50%, of which 11 were fully reporting (100%). However, for CHM-related information, 65 (59.6%) SRs did not report the specific name of the CHM in the title, 42 (38.5%) lacked TCM-related rationales in the introduction, 62 (56.9%) did not include CHM-related characteristics in the additional analyses, and 77 (70.6%) did not analyze CHM results in terms of TCM-related theories in the discussion. Of 97 SRs that included clinical trials, 38 (39.2%) did not provide the details of composition and dosage of CHMs, 85 (87.6%) did not report the CHM sources, 13 (13.4%) did not provide the dosage form, 95 (97.9%) lacked CHM quality control information, and 57 (58.8%) did not describe details of the controls. For 62 (72.9%) of 85 SRs that included meta-analysis, it was impossible to assess whether meta-analysis had been properly conducted due to inadequate reporting of CHM interventions.ConclusionAlthough the Cochrane SRs of CHM showed reporting compliance with PRISMA checklist, their reporting quality needs improvement, especially about full reporting of CHM interventions and of TCM-related rationales. Reporting guideline of "PRISMA extension for CHM interventions" should be developed thus to improve their quality.

Project description:Eating disorders are psychiatric conditions originated from and perpetuated by individual, family and sociocultural factors. The psychosocial approach to treatment and prevention of relapse is crucial. To present an overview of the scientific evidence on effectiveness of psychosocial interventions in treatment of eating disorders. All systematic reviews published by the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews - Cochrane Library on the topic were included. Afterwards, as from the least recent date of these reviews (2001), an additional search was conducted at PubMed with sensitive search strategy and with the same keywords used. A total of 101 primary studies and 30 systematic reviews (5 Cochrane systematic reviews), meta-analysis, guidelines or narrative reviews of literature were included. The main outcomes were: symptomatic remission, body image, cognitive distortion, psychiatric comorbidity, psychosocial functioning and patient satisfaction. The cognitive behavioral approach was the most effective treatment, especially for bulimia nervosa, binge eating disorder and the night eating syndrome. For anorexia nervosa, the family approach showed greater effectiveness. Other effective approaches were interpersonal psychotherapy, dialectic behavioral therapy, support therapy and self-help manuals. Moreover, there was an increasing number of preventive and promotional approaches that addressed individual, family and social risk factors, being promising for the development of positive self-image and self-efficacy. Further studies are required to evaluate the impact of multidisciplinary approaches on all eating disorders, as well as the cost-effectiveness of some effective modalities, such as the cognitive behavioral therapy. RESUMO Transtornos alimentares são doenças psiquiátricas originadas de e perpetuadas por fatores individuais, familiares e socioculturais. A abordagem psicossocial é essencial para o tratamento e a prevenção de recaídas. Apresentar uma visão geral das evidências científicas sobre a efetividade das intervenções psicossociais no tratamento de transtornos alimentares. Foram incluídas todas as revisões sistemáticas publicadas no Banco de Dados de Revisões Sistemáticas da Cochrane Library. Posteriormente, a partir da data menos recente destas revisões (2001), realizou-se uma busca adicional no PubMed, com estratégia de busca sensibilizada e com os mesmos descritores utilizados antes. No total, foram incluídos 101 estudos primários e 30 revisões sistemáticas (5 revisões sistemáticas da Cochrane), metanálises, diretrizes ou revisões narrativas da literatura. Os principais desfechos foram remissão de sintomas, imagem corporal, distorção cognitiva, comorbidade psiquiátrica, funcionamento psicossocial e satisfação do paciente. A abordagem cognitivo-comportamental foi o tratamento mais efetivo, principalmente para bulimia nervosa, transtorno da compulsão alimentar periódica e síndrome do comer noturno. Para anorexia nervosa, a abordagem familiar demonstrou maior efetividade. Outras abordagens efetivas foram psicoterapia interpessoal, terapia comportamental dialética, terapia de apoio e manuais de autoajuda. Além disso, houve um número crescente de abordagens preventivas e promocionais que contemplaram fatores de risco individuais, familiares e sociais, sendo promissoras para o desenvolvimento da autoimagem positiva e autoeficácia. São necessários mais estudos que avaliem o impacto de abordagens multidisciplinares em todos transtornos alimentares, além da relação custo-efetividade de algumas modalidades efetivas, como a terapia cognitivo-comportamental.