- Framework of problems / Comprehensive
- Ignores setting or context of included studies which limits review applicability
- Opposing systematic reviews: the effects of two quality rating instruments on evidence regarding t'ai chi and bone mineral density in postmenopausal women
| Ref ID | 281 |
| First Author | S. Y. Alperson |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF ALTERNATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE |
| Year Of Publishing | 2011 |
| URL | https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/acm.2010.0175 |
| Keywords |
Complimentary & Alternative Risk of bias |
| Problem(s) |
Ignores setting or context of included studies which limits review applicability Flawed risk of bias undertaken |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 2 |
| Summary of Findings | Two systematic reviews of t’ai chi interventions on bone mineral density in postmenopausal women were found to have starkly opposing conclusions due to the choice of quality appraisal tool. The authors conclude that the use of the Jadad scale in one review was not only inadequate but also inappropriate for reviewing t’ai chi studies, potentially misleading researchers, clinicians and policymakers. |
| Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | Yes |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | Yes |