Dataset Information

A scoping review of cohort studies assessing traditional Chinese medicine interventions.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUNDS:Identifying topics and assessing the reporting quality of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) cohort studies. METHODS:A scoping review of the literature was performed. A descriptive approach to summarize the core study characteristics was prepared, along with structured tables and figures to identify salient points of differences noted across studies. The reporting quality of TCM cohort studies was assessed according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE)-cohort checklist. RESULTS:A total of 199 TCM cohort studies were included. The largest number of TCM cohort studies was conducted in Mainland China (70.9%). The TCM cohort study was first published in 2003. The top three diseases studied were Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS), Stroke, and Asthma. As for the intervention methods, Chinese herbal medicine formulas (60.3%), acupuncture (14.1%) and single herbs (12.6%) accounted for the majority, followed by moxibustion (4.0%) and qigong (2.0%). The overage sufficient reporting rate of included TCM cohort studies according to the STROBE-cohort checklist was 42.9%. Comparing with Chinese literature, the reporting rates of English literature in most items were higher. CONCLUSION:For the application of cohort studies to inform the effects of TCM interventions, the interventions assessed and conditions studied were diverse, the reporting quality was unsatisfied.

SUBMITTER: Duan Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7684743 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A scoping review of cohort studies assessing traditional Chinese medicine interventions.

Duan Yuting Y Xu Zhirui Z Deng Jingjing J Lin Yanjia Y Zheng Yan Y Chen Juexuan J Tang Xiaoyu X Zhang Xuan X Tang Chunzhi C Miao Jiangxia J Bian Zhaoxiang Z

BMC complementary medicine and therapies 20201123 1

<h4>Backgrounds</h4>Identifying topics and assessing the reporting quality of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) cohort studies.<h4>Methods</h4>A scoping review of the literature was performed. A descriptive approach to summarize the core study characteristics was prepared, along with structured tables and figures to identify salient points of differences noted across studies. The reporting quality of TCM cohort studies was assessed according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational S ...[more]

PMID: 33228628

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTraditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been widely applied for cancer care in China. There have been a large number of controlled clinical studies published in Chinese literature, yet no systematic searching and analysis has been done. This study summarizes the current evidence of controlled clinical studies of TCM for cancer.MethodsWe searched all the controlled clinical studies of TCM therapies for all kinds of cancers published in Chinese in four main Chinese electronic databases from their inception to November 2011. We bibliometrically analyzed the included studies and assessed the reporting quality.ResultsA total of 2964 reports (involving 253,434 cancer patients) including 2385 randomized controlled trials and 579 non-randomized controlled studies were included. The top seven cancer types treated were lung cancer, liver cancer, stomach cancer, breast cancer, esophagus cancer, colorectal cancer and nasopharyngeal cancer by both study numbers and case numbers. The majority of studies (72%) applied TCM therapy combined with conventional treatment, whilst fewer (28%) applied only TCM therapy in the experimental groups. Herbal medicine was the most frequently applied TCM therapy (2677 studies, 90.32%). The most frequently reported outcome was clinical symptom improvement (1667 studies, 56.24%) followed by biomarker indices (1270 studies, 42.85%), quality of life (1129 studies, 38.09%), chemo/radiotherapy induced side effects (1094 studies, 36.91%), tumor size (869 studies, 29.32%) and safety (547 studies, 18.45%). Completeness and adequacy of reporting appeared to improve with time.ConclusionsData from controlled clinical studies of TCM therapies in cancer treatment is substantial, and different therapies are applied either as monotherapy or in combination with conventional medicine. Reporting of controlled clinical studies should be improved based on the CONSORT and TREND Statements in future. Further studies should address the most frequently used TCM therapy for common cancers and outcome measures should address survival, relapse/metastasis and quality of life.

Project description:Objectives: It has been recommended that clinical trials of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) would be more ecologically valid if its characteristic mode of diagnostic reasoning were integrated into their design. In that context, however, it is also widely held that demonstrating a high level of agreement on initial TCM diagnoses is necessary for the replicability that the biomedical paradigm requires for the conclusions from such trials. Our aim was to review, summarize, and critique quantitative experimental studies of inter-rater agreement in TCM, and some of their underlying assumptions. Design: Systematic electronic searches were conducted for articles that reported a quantitative measure of inter-rater agreement across a number of rating choices based on examinations of human subjects in person by TCM practitioners, and published in English language peer-reviewed journals. Publications in languages other than English were not included, nor those appearing in other than peer-reviewed journals. Predefined categories of information were extracted from full texts by two investigators working independently. Each article was scored for methodological quality. Outcome measures: Design features across all studies and levels of inter-rater agreement across studies that reported the same type of outcome statistic were compared. Results: Twenty-one articles met inclusion criteria. Fourteen assessed inter-rater agreement on TCM diagnoses, two on diagnostic signs found upon traditional TCM examination, and five on novel rating schemes derived from TCM theory and practice. Raters were students of TCM colleges or graduates of TCM training programs with 3 or more years experience and licensure. Type of outcome statistic varied. Mean rates of pairwise agreement averaged 57% (median 65, range 19-96) across the 9 studies reporting them. Mean Cohen's kappa averaged 0.34 (median 0.34, range 0.07-0.59) across the seven studies reporting them. Meta-analysis was not possible due to variations in study design and outcome statistics. High risks of bias and confounding, and deficits in statistical reporting were common. Conclusions: With a few exceptions, the levels of agreement were low to moderate. Most studies had significant deficits of both methodology and reporting. Results overall suggest a few design features that might contribute to higher levels of agreement. These should be studied further with better experimental controls and more thorough reporting of outcomes. In addition, methods of complex systems analysis should be explored to more adequately model the relationship between clinical outcomes, and the series of diagnoses and treatments that are the norm in actual TCM practice.

Project description:Cohort studies investigating the treatment of chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs) with traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) have considerably accumulated in recent years. To systematically and for the first time present the achievements and dilemmas of cohort studies, strict inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to search publications from the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases for cohort studies on NCDs with TCM since the establishment of these databases. Information on the year of publication, exposure factors, diseases, and outcome indicators was obtained, and a literature quality assessment and bibliometric descriptive analysis were conducted. A total of 182 published articles involving 1,615,106 cases were included. There were 110 non-prospective cohort studies and 72 prospective cohort studies. The diseases involved in the cohort studies were, in the order of the number of published articles, malignant tumors (82 articles, 45.05%), cardiovascular diseases (35 articles, 19.23%), neurological diseases (29 articles, 15.93%), chronic kidney diseases (16 articles, 8.79%), liver cirrhosis (8 articles, 4.40%), diabetes mellitus (8 articles, 4.40%), and chronic respiratory diseases (4 articles, 2.20%). The study participants were mainly from China (177 articles, 97.25%). The number of cohort studies increased significantly in the last 5 years (65 articles, 35.71%), and following the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) literature quality evaluation, the number of articles that received a score of four to five was high (116 articles, 63.73%), and the overall quality needs to be improved. The application of cohort studies in the field of TCM for the prevention and treatment of NCDs has developed rapidly in the past 5 years, focusing on the prevention and treatment of tumors as well as cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. However, the design and implementation of cohort studies still have considerable limitations. To provide more clinical evidence, researcher should actively cooperate with evidence-based methodologists and standardize the implementation of cohort studies.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Network meta-analysis (NMA) has rapidly grown in use during the past decade for the comparison of healthcare interventions. While its general use in the comparison of conventional medicines has been studied previously, to our awareness, its use to assess complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) has not been studied. A scoping review of the literature was performed to identify systematic reviews incorporating NMAs involving one or more CAM interventions. METHODS:An information specialist executed a multi-database search (e.g., MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane), and two reviewers performed study selection and data collection. Information on publication characteristics, diseases studied, interventions compared, reporting transparency, outcomes assessed, and other parameters were extracted from each review. RESULTS:A total of 89 SR/NMAs were included. The largest number of NMAs was conducted in China (39.3%), followed by the United Kingdom (12.4%) and the United States (9.0%). Reviews were published between 2010 and 2018, with the majority published between 2015 and 2018. More than 90 different CAM therapies appeared at least once, and the median number per NMA was 2 (IQR 1-4); 20.2% of reviews consisted of only CAM therapies. Dietary supplements (51.1%) and vitamins and minerals (42.2%) were the most commonly studied therapies, followed by electrical stimulation (31.1%), herbal medicines (24.4%), and acupuncture and related treatments (22.2%). A diverse set of conditions was identified, the most common being various forms of cancer (11.1%), osteoarthritis of the hip/knee (7.8%), and depression (5.9%). Most reviews adequately addressed a majority of the PRISMA NMA extension items; however, there were limitations in indication of an existing review protocol, exploration of network geometry, and exploration of risk of bias across studies, such as publication bias. CONCLUSION:The use of NMA to assess the effectiveness of CAM interventions is growing rapidly. Efforts to identify priority topics for future CAM-related NMAs and to enhance methods for CAM comparisons with conventional medicine are needed. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://ruor.uottawa.ca/handle/10393/35658.

Dataset Information

A scoping review of cohort studies assessing traditional Chinese medicine interventions.

Publications

A scoping review of cohort studies assessing traditional Chinese medicine interventions.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets