Acupuncture for neurological disorders in the Cochrane reviews Characteristics of included reviews and studies

被引:1
|
作者
Deren Wang 1
机构
关键词
Acupuncture; nervous system disease; randomized controlled trials; systematic reviews;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R246 [针灸疗法临床应用];
学科分类号
100512 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE:To summarize Cochrane reviews of acupuncture for neurological disorders,and characteristics of included reviews and studies.DATA SOURCES:A computer-based online search of the Cochrane Library (Issue 7 of 12,July 2010) was performed with the key word "acupuncture" and systematic evaluations for acupuncture for neurological disorders were screened.STUDY SELECTION:Systematic reviews on acupuncture in the treatment of neurological disorders were included,and the characteristics of these reviews were analyzed based on methods recommended by the Cochrane collaboration.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Basic characteristics,methodological quality,main reasons for excluding trials,results and conclusions of Cochrane reviews were assessed.RESULTS:A total of 18 Cochrane systematic reviews were included,including 13 completed reviews and five research protocols.The 13 completed reviews involved 111 randomized controlled trials,including 43 trials (38.7%) conducted in China,47 trials (42.3%) using sham-acupuncture or placebo as control,15 trials (13.5%) with relatively high quality,91 trials (81.9%) reporting data on follow-up.Primary outcomes used in the Cochrane reviews were reported by 65 trials (58.6%),and adverse events were reported in 11 trials (9.9%).Two hundred and eighty three trials were excluded.Two reviews on headache suggested that acupuncture is a valuable non-drug treatment for patients with chronic or recurrent headache,and has better curative effects on migraine compared with preventative drug treatment.CONCLUSION:Of the Cochrane reviews on acupuncture in the treatment of neurological disorders,two reviews evaluating the efficacy of acupuncture in treating headaches drew positive conculsions,while other reviews did not obtain positive conclusions due to a small sample size or low methodological quality.The methodological quality of acupuncture trials needs further improvement.
引用
收藏
页码:440 / 443
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Process of developing systematic reviews, including Cochrane reviews
    Bala, Malgorzata M.
    Lesniak, Wiktoria
    Jaeschke, Roman
    [J]. POLSKIE ARCHIWUM MEDYCYNY WEWNETRZNEJ-POLISH ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2015, 125 : 16 - 25
  • [42] Cancer treatment reviews welcomes submission of the Cochrane Reviews
    Pavtidis, N
    Stahel, R
    Clarke, M
    Djulbegovic, B
    [J]. CANCER TREATMENT REVIEWS, 2006, 32 (04) : 243 - 244
  • [43] Reply: Quality assessment of studies included in systematic reviews
    Boelig, Rupsa C.
    Saccone, Gabriele
    Berghella, Vincenzo
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY MFM, 2022, 4 (05)
  • [44] Over 85% of included studies in systematic reviews are on MEDLINE
    Booth, Andrew
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2016, 79 : 165 - 166
  • [45] ASSESSING BIAS IN OSTEOARTHRITIS TRIALS INCLUDED IN COCHRANE REVIEWS: A META-EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDY
    Bolvig, J.
    Juhl, C. B.
    Boutron, I.
    Tugwell, P.
    Ghogomu, E. A.
    Pardo, J. Pardo
    Rader, T.
    Wells, G. A.
    Mayhew, A.
    Maxwell, L.
    Lund, H.
    Bliddal, H.
    Christensen, R.
    [J]. OSTEOARTHRITIS AND CARTILAGE, 2016, 24 : S42 - S43
  • [46] Cochrane reviews used more rigorous methods than non-Cochrane reviews: survey of systematic reviews in physiotherapy
    Moseley, Anne M.
    Elkins, Mark R.
    Herbert, Robert D.
    Maher, Christopher G.
    Sherrington, Catherine
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2009, 62 (10) : 1021 - 1030
  • [47] Quality of Cochrane reviews - Another study found that most Cochrane reviews are of a good standard
    Handoll, H
    Madhok, R
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 324 (7336): : 546 - 546
  • [48] Ensuring relevance for Cochrane reviews: evaluating processes and methods for prioritizing topics for Cochrane reviews
    Nasser, Mona
    Welch, Vivian
    Tugwell, Peter
    Ueffing, Erin
    Doyle, Jodie
    Waters, Elizabeth
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2013, 66 (05) : 474 - 482
  • [49] Cochrane Reviews are not perfect - but generally better than non-Cochrane systematic reviews
    Bollig, Claudia
    Rueschemeyer, Georg
    Meerpohl, Joerg J.
    [J]. SUCHT-ZEITSCHRIFT FUR WISSENSCHAFT UND PRAXIS, 2020, 66 (03): : 170 - 172
  • [50] Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
    Solari, A.
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY, 2009, 16 (01)