The reporting quality and risk of bias of randomized controlled trials of acupuncture for migraine: Methodological study based on STRICTA and RoB 2.0

被引:18
|
作者
Lu, Tingting [1 ,2 ]
Lu, Cuncun [1 ,2 ]
Li, Huijuan [1 ,2 ]
Xing, Xin [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Deng, Xiuxiu [4 ]
Li, Xiuxia [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Yongfeng [3 ]
Niu, Junqiang [5 ]
Liu, Yali [6 ]
Yang, Kehu [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Lanzhou Univ, Evidence Based Med Ctr, Sch Basic Med Sci, Lanzhou, Peoples R China
[2] Key Lab Evidence Based Med & Knowledge Translat G, Lanzhou, Peoples R China
[3] Gansu Univ Tradit Chinese Med, Lanzhou, Peoples R China
[4] Chengdu Univ Tradit Chinese Med, Chengdu, Peoples R China
[5] Lanzhou Univ, Hosp 1, Lanzhou, Peoples R China
[6] Capital Med Univ, Beijing Childrens Hosp, Ctr Clin Epidemiol & Evidence Based Med, Beijing, Peoples R China
关键词
Acupuncture; Migraine; Reporting quality; Risk of bias; STRICTA; RoB; 2.0; PROPHYLAXIS; EFFICACY; ELECTROACUPUNCTURE; STIMULATION; PREVENTION; METOPROLOL; INJECTION; STANDARDS; HEADACHE; ACUPOINT;
D O I
10.1016/j.ctim.2020.102433
中图分类号
R [医药、卫生];
学科分类号
10 ;
摘要
Objectives: To investigate the reporting quality and risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture for migraine, to facilitate and improve the quality of RCTs of acupuncture for migraine. Methods: The Cochrane Library, PubMed and EMBASE were searched from inception to June 11, 2019 using a comprehensive search strategy. The reporting quality and risk of bias of included RCTs were independently evaluated by two investigators using STRICTA and RoB 2.0. Any disagreement was resolved by a third investigator. Results: A total of 28 eligible RCTs were published in 24 academic journals from 1994 to 2018. Based on STRICTA, four sub-items including "details of other interventions" (1/28, 4 %), "setting and context of treatment" (9/28, 32 %), "the extent to which treatment was varied" (11/28, 39 %), and "number of needle insertions per subject per session" (13/28, 46 %), showed low reporting quality. A total of 32 different outcomes were reported in 28 RCTs, and based on RoB 2.0, nine (9/28, 32 %) RCTs were judged to be high RoB, three of which were owing to deviations from intended interventions; 11(11/28, 39 %) RCTs elicited some concerns; and eight (8/28, 29 %) RCTs were low RoB for their outcomes. Conclusions: The reporting quality and risk of bias of RCTs of acupuncture for migraine remain suboptimal. Therefore, all stakeholders should make a contribution to improve the quality of RCTs of acupuncture for migraine using STRICTA and RoB 2.0, while not limiting this approach solely to studies on migraine, using STRICTA and RoB 2.0 tools.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 37 条
  • [21] Methodological Quality and Risk of Bias Assessment of Cardiovascular Disease Research: Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Published in 2017
    Baasan, Odgerel
    Freihat, Omar
    Nagy, David U.
    Lohner, Szimonetta
    FRONTIERS IN CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE, 2022, 9
  • [22] Quality and Risk of Bias in Panax ginseng Randomized Controlled Trials: A Review
    Shergis, Johannah L.
    Zhang, Anthony L.
    Zhou, Wenyu
    Xue, Charlie C.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CHINESE MEDICINE, 2013, 41 (02): : 231 - 252
  • [23] Status, reporting completeness and methodological quality of pilot randomised controlled trials in acupuncture: protocol for a systematic review
    Zhang, Yajun
    Hu, Hantong
    Li, Xiaoyu
    Lou, Jiali
    He, Xiaofen
    Jiang, Yongliang
    Fang, Jianqiao
    BMJ OPEN, 2021, 11 (12):
  • [24] Reporting characteristics and risk of bias in randomised controlled trials of acupuncture analgesia published in PubMed-listed journals
    Li, Xiuxia
    Wang, Rong
    Shi, Xiue
    Chen, Zehao
    Pan, Yuanqing
    Li, Xusheng
    Yang, Kehu
    ACUPUNCTURE IN MEDICINE, 2017, 35 (04) : 259 - 267
  • [25] Quality of Reporting Randomized Controlled Trials in Five Leading Neurology Journals in 2008 and 2013 Using the Modified "Risk of Bias" Tool
    Zhai, Xiao
    Cui, Jin
    Wang, Yiran
    Qu, Zhiquan
    Mu, Qingchun
    Li, Peiwen
    Zhang, Chaochao
    Yang, Mingyuan
    Chen, Xiao
    Chen, Ziqiang
    Li, Ming
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2017, 99 : 687 - +
  • [26] A systematic review of the quality of reporting and risk of bias for randomized crossover trials in digestive disease journals
    Zhou, Qian
    Chen, Zhi-Hang
    Zhang, Jin-Xin
    Peng, Sui
    THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES IN GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2022, 15
  • [27] Methodological reporting of randomized controlled trials in major hepato-gastroenterology journals in 2008 and 1998: a comparative study
    Ji-Lin Wang
    Tian-Tian Sun
    Yan-Wei Lin
    Rong Lu
    Jing-Yuan Fang
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11
  • [28] Study Design and Quality of Reporting of Randomized Controlled Trials of Chronic Idiopathic or Autoimmune Urticaria: Review
    Le Fourn, Elodie
    Giraudeau, Bruno
    Chosidow, Olivier
    Doutre, Marie-Sylvie
    Lorette, Gerard
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (08):
  • [29] Reliability of the risk of bias assessment in randomized controlled trials for nursing: A cross-sectional study
    Yao, Yi
    Li, Nian
    Li, Jieling
    Feng, Jia
    Ma, Jingxin
    Liao, Xiaoyang
    Zhang, Yonggang
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING PRACTICE, 2024, 30 (06)
  • [30] Methodological quality of antimalarial randomized controlled trials during pregnancy and its impact on the risk of low birth weight
    Muanda, Flory T.
    Berard, Anick
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2016, 82 (03) : 806 - 813