Use and reporting of risk of bias tools in 825 systematic reviews of acupuncture: a cross-sectional study

Ref ID 834
First Author Y. Long
Journal ACUPUNCTURE IN MEDICINE
Year Of Publishing 2021
URL https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0964528420946043?casa_token=fyJvHCu0d3gAAAAA:0S1xRsYNcIBZ2TucCI4lvP63gztf8LnLY_2N5UwpeeXs3Rh1Iuq3iUaJs-hNl3apIwU5OALn1_6n2A
Keywords Complimentary & Alternative
Risk of bias
Problem(s) Cochrane reviews more rigorous/higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews
Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias
Number of systematic reviews included 825
Summary of Findings Of the 825 systematic reviews of acupuncture published up to November 2017, 7% did not report any results, and only 10% reported relatively complete and adequate risk of bias assessment. Cochrane systematic reviews reported more complete assessments than Chinese-language or non-Cochrane English-language systematic reviews.
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