- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Intervention not described / defined
- Assessment of the quality of reporting for treatment components in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture
Ref ID | 138 |
First Author | K. H. Kim |
Journal | BMJ OPEN |
Year Of Publishing | 2014 |
URL | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3902460/pdf/bmjopen-2013-004136.pdf |
Keywords |
Cochrane Complimentary & Alternative Low reporting quality |
Problem(s) |
Intervention not described / defined Individual study characteristics not reported sufficiently Weaknesses identified in some Cochrane reviews |
Number of systematic reviews included | 25 |
Summary of Findings | The 25 included Cochrane reviews were 16% less likely to report the acupuncture-related items using the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) tool, than the 92 randomised controlled trials comprising the reviews (risk ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.88, I2=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. |
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | Not Applicable |
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | No |