Improving the quality of randomized controlled trials in Chinese herbal medicine, Part Ⅳ: applying a revised CONSORT checklist to measure reporting quality

Zhaoxiang Bian

35 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Chinese Integrative Medicine

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Complementary and Alternative Medicine Studies Medical Research and Treatments

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To discuss the quality of reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM), and to provide suggestions for improving the reporting of future clinical studies in this therapeutic area. METHODS: A search of the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify RCTs of CHM. A revised CONSORT checklist designed for CHM clinical studies was implemented. The revised CONSORT checklist contained 63 items, including the following new items added specifically for CHM: (1) "syndrome of disease" based on Chinese medicine theories; (2) rationale of CHM formula; (3) formula composition; (4) preparation form of CHM; (5) quality control of CHM. RESULTS: The overall reporting quality of the RCTs as assessed with the revised CONSORT checklist varied between 19% and 44%, with a median score of 32% (standard deviation 8%). CONCLUSION: The overall quality of reporting of RCTs of CHM evaluated with a revised CONSORT checklist was poor, reflecting the need for improvements in reporting future clinical trials in this area. RECOMMENDATIONS: To improve the quality of reporting of RCTs of CHM, we recommend adopting a revised CONSORT checklist that includes items specific to CHM. We also recommend that editors of CHM journals require authors to use a structured approach to presenting their trials as a condition of publication.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 35 citations exist upstream.

References

1995Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials 2001The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials 2001The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration 1996Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement 2003How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study 2001Use of the CONSORT Statement and Quality of Reports of Randomized Trials 1994Assessing the Quality of Randomization From Reports of Controlled Trials Published in Obstetrics and Gynecology Journals 1982Reporting on Methods in Clinical Trials

Cited by

2007Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials of Traditional Chinese Medicine (CONSORT for TCM) (For Solicitation of Comments)2007Systematic reviews and meta‐analyses in coloproctology: interpretation and potential pitfalls 2007Evaluating the Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials that Examine the Efficacy of Natural Health Products: A Systematic Review of Critical Appraisal Instruments

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.