- Framework of problems / Rigorous
- Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias
- 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 |
• Risk of bias • Complimentary & Alternative |
| 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? | N/A |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | No |