1. 首都医科大学附属北京中医医院
2. 北京中医药大学循证医学中心
纸质出版:2021
移动端阅览
[1]龙德怀,刘建平,刘红旭.T1级中医药科技期刊2018年发表的随机对照试验质量评价[J].中医杂志,2021,62(11):956-960.
LONG Dehuai, LIU Jianping, LIU Hongxu. Quality Evaluation of Randomized Controlled Trials Published on T1 Level Journals of Traditional Chinese Medicine in 2018[J]. Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine2021, 62(11): 956-960.
[1]龙德怀,刘建平,刘红旭.T1级中医药科技期刊2018年发表的随机对照试验质量评价[J].中医杂志,2021,62(11):956-960. DOI: 10.13288/j.11-2166/r.2021.11.008.
LONG Dehuai, LIU Jianping, LIU Hongxu. Quality Evaluation of Randomized Controlled Trials Published on T1 Level Journals of Traditional Chinese Medicine in 2018[J]. Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine2021, 62(11): 956-960. DOI: 10.13288/j.11-2166/r.2021.11.008.
目的评价T1级中医药科技期刊2018年发表的中医药随机对照试验(RCT)文章质量
为提高RCT文章质量提供依据。方法检索中国知网
纳入T1级中医药科技期刊(包括《中医杂志》《中华中医药杂志》《中华中医药学刊》《北京中医药大学学报》《中国中药杂志》《中草药》《中国实验方剂学杂志》《中国中西医结合杂志》《中国针灸》)2018年1—12月刊载的临床研究
筛选出RCT论文
采用CONSORT 2010声明、Cochrane偏倚风险量表及附加指标对其进行质量评价。结果 2018年1—12月T1级中医药科技期刊共发表RCT论文669篇。Cochrane偏倚风险量表评价结果显示
随机方法低偏倚风险占76.1%(509篇);分配隐藏风险不确定者占92.7%(620篇);患者及试验人员盲法的高偏倚风险占93.6%(626篇);结局评价者盲法的高偏倚风险占82.1%(549篇);结果数据完整性的低偏倚风险占100.0%(669篇);选择性报告项的风险不确定占100.0%(669篇)。CONSORT 2010声明评价结果表明
所有RCT均报告了统计学方法(100.0%
669篇)
90%(600篇)的RCT报告了随机序列产生方法;报告不良反应情况者占49.5%(331篇);而对于随机分配隐藏、盲法的报告分别仅有6.4%(43篇)、7.5%(50篇)。附加指标显示
84.3%(564篇)的RCT提及了知情同意
61.6%(412篇)提及了辨证分型
53.1%(355篇)提及了伦理审批
34.5%(231篇)采用中医证候疗效标准
但多中心试验仅7.2%(48篇)。结论 T1级中医药科技期刊2018年刊登的RCT论文整体质量较高
但研究方法学及中医药特色等条目尚有较大提升空间。
Objective To evaluate the quality of randomized controlled trials(RCTs) of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) published in 2018 on T1 level journals of TCM
and to provide references for future improvement of quality of RCTs. Methods CNKI was searched for TCM RCTs published from January to December
2018 on T1 level journals of TCM
including Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine
China Journal of Traditional Chinese Medicine and Pharmacy
Chinese Archives of Traditional Chinese Medicine
Journal of Beijing University of Traditional Chinese Medicine
China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica
Chinese Traditional and Herbal Drugs
Chinese Journal of Experimental Traditional Medicine Formalae
Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine
and Chinese Acupuncture and Moxibustion. CONSORT 2010 statement
Cochrane risk bias scale and additional indicators were used to evaluate the quality of the included RCTs. Results From January to December
2018
there were 669 RCTs published on T1 level journals of TCM. Cochrane risk of bias assessment showed that 76.1%(509) of the included RCTs were at low risk of bias for random sequence generation; 92.7%(620) of the RCTs were assessed at unclear risk for allocation concealment; high risk of bias was found in 93.6%(626) of the included RCTs in terms of blinding of participants and personnel
and in 82.1%(549) of the included RCTs regarding the blinding of outcome assessors; all the RCTs were assessed at low risk of bias for incomplete outcome data
and at unclear risk of bias for selective reporting. According to the CONSORT 2010 statement
all RCTs reported the statistical methods; 90%(600) of the RCTs reported the methods of random sequence generation; 49.5%(331) of the RCTs reported the adverse events; 6.4%(43) and 7.5%(50) of the RCTs reported allocation concealment and blinding items. Additional assessments indicated that the percentage of the included RCTs having reported informed consent
syndrome differentiation
ethical approvement
TCM effectiveness evaluation standard
and a multi-center trial design was 84.3%(564)
61.6%(412)
53.1%(355)
34.5%(231) and 7.2%(48)
respectively. Conclusion The overall quality of the RCTs published on the T1 level journals of TCM in 2018 is relatively high
but there is still much for improvement on the methodological and TCM-specific items.
0
浏览量
18
下载量
8
CSCD
关联资源
相关文章
相关作者
相关机构
京公网安备11010102007558号