- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Weaknesses identified in some Cochrane reviews
- Cochrane systematic reviews on traditional Chinese medicine: What matters-the quantity or quality of evidence?
Ref ID | 783 |
First Author | Z. Dai |
Journal | PHYTOMEDICINE |
Year Of Publishing | 2022 |
URL | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S094471132100461X |
Keywords |
Cochrane Complimentary & Alternative Low methodological quality |
Problem(s) |
Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality Weaknesses identified in some Cochrane reviews |
Number of systematic reviews included | 104 |
Summary of Findings | From 104 included systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews up to May 2021 on traditional Chinese medicine. According to AMSTAR 2, 51 (49.0%) Cochrane systematic reviews were of low quality. |
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 |