| Ref ID | 45 |
| First Author | S. Luo |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE‐BASED MEDICINE |
| Year Of Publishing | 2020 |
| URL | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/jebm.12372?download=true |
| Keywords |
• Risk of bias • Complementary & Alternative |
| Problem(s) |
• Flawed risk of bias undertaken • No quality assessment undertaken or reported |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | China |
| Aim | To assess the use of risk of bias assessment tools and the reporting quality of risk of bias assessment results in systematic reviews of acupuncture for depression published across several databases up to November 2017. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | Of the 39 included systematic reviews of acupuncture for depression, two (5%) did not perform a risk of bias assessment, 18.9% did not report the risk of bias assessment results, and 62.2% did not report the assessment results of each risk of bias item. Text descriptions and tables were commonly used in reporting forms. Only 32.4% of systematic reviews reported support for judgment. The reporting rate of risk of bias assessment results was low in all items (13.5%-35.1%). |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 39 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 164 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |