- Framework of problems / Rigorous
- Weaknesses identified in some Cochrane reviews
- 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? | N/A |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | No |