Heterogeneity in search strategies among Cochrane acupuncture reviews: is there room for improvement?

Ref ID 167
First Author S. Lui
Year Of Publishing 2010
URL https://core.ac.uk/download/56031.pdf
Keywords Cochrane
Complimentary & Alternative
External validity
Problem(s) Language restriction
Overly stringent inclusion criteria affecting external validity
Number of systematic reviews included 48
Summary of Findings Of the 48 completed Cochrane reviews only 13 (27%) of the included reviews and protocols searched Chinese language databases. The majority of the 48 full reviews (n=28), were inconclusive because of a lack of included studies to fully answer the research question. After stratifying on the use of Chinese databases, a greater proportion of the reviews which did not search Chinese databases were inconclusive as to the effectiveness of acupuncture (68.6% compared with 30.8%). 41.5% of the included articles had at least one Chinese speaking author. Two-thirds of the reviews and protocols (n=40) had the capacity or stated that they translated Chinese language abstracts to determine inclusion for the review. However, seven (10.8%) articles had a language restriction on the inclusion criteria and only reviewed English language articles.
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