Evaluation of Reporting Quality in Randomised Controlled Trials of Acupuncture for Acute Herpes Zoster by the CONSORT Statement and STRICTA Guidelines
Evaluation of Reporting Quality in Randomised Controlled Trials of Acupuncture for Acute Herpes Zoster by the CONSORT Statement and STRICTA Guidelines
复制标题
根据 CONSORT 声明和 STRICTA 指南评估针灸治疗急性带状疱疹随机对照试验的报告质量。
DOI：
10.1155/2020/4308380
复制
发表时间：
2020-02-18
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Lin, Guohua
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Qian, Guifeng;Zeng, Jingchun;Lin, Guohua
Objective.通过CONSORT声明和STRICTA指南对针灸治疗急性带状疱疹随机对照试验（RCT）的报告质量进行评价，探讨提高RCT报告质量的方法。方法.从数据库创建至2018年10月检索了英文和中文数据库，并更新至2019年7月。根据CONSORT声明和STRICTA指南对纳入文献的基本特征和方法学质量进行评价。本研究采用描述性统计分析。两名研究人员之间的所有项目的协议是由科恩的kappa统计计算。结果共纳入40项RCT。根据CONSORT声明，标题或摘要中的“背景”、“随机”、“统计方法”和“结局和估计”项目报告良好，阳性率> 80%。但“样本量”、“分配隐藏”、“实施”、“设盲”、“流程图”、“意向治疗分析”、“辅助分析”、“临床试验登记”等项目的报告质量很差，阳性率为80%。“针数”、“针深”、“反应”、“从业人员背景”等项目的报告质量较低，阳性率
Objective. To explore the methods for improving the reporting quality of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on acupuncture through evaluating the reporting quality in RCTs of acupuncture for acute herpes zoster by the CONSORT statement and STRICTA guidelines. Methods. English and Chinese databases were searched from database creation until October 2018 and updated to July 2019. The basic characteristics and methodological quality of the literatures included were evaluated based on the CONSORT statement and the STRICTA guidelines. Descriptive statistical analysis was used in this study. The agreement between the two researchers of all items was calculated by Cohen's kappa statistics. Results. A total of 40 RCTs were included. Based on the CONSORT statement, items "Background," "Randomised" in the title or abstract," "Statistical methods," and "Outcomes and estimation" were good reporting, with positive rates >80%. However, the quality of reporting in items "Sample size," "Allocation concealment," "Implementation," "Blinding," "Flow chart," "Intent-to-treat analysis," "Ancillary analyses," and "Clinical Trials Register" was very poor, with positive rates 80%. The reporting quality of items "Numbers of needles inserted," "Depth of insertion," "Responses elicited," and "Practitioner background" was lower, with positive rates