| Ref ID | 174 |
| First Author | X. Q. Li |
| Journal | ACUPUNCTURE IN MEDICINE |
| Year Of Publishing | 2016 |
| URL | https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1136/acupmed-2015-010876 |
| Keywords |
• Risk of bias • Complementary & Alternative |
| Problem(s) |
• Meta-analyses and forest plots presented without considering risk of bias / quality • Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | China |
| Aim | To assess how critical appraisals of risk of bias informs the synthesis of evidence in systematic reviews of acupuncture for pain relief published up to 2014. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | Most (85/91; 93%) systematic reviews of acupuncture for pain relief published up to 2014 conducted some form of risk of bias assessment, but nearly half of them (48/95; 57%) failed to incorporate the risk of bias assessment into the synthesis. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 91 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 204 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |