Based on previous evidence-based researches and teaching experience, our team conducted literature and book review, and summarized 4 requirements, 1) effect measure calculation and conversion, 2) registration of evidence-based research, 3) evidence-based research database and 4) quality evaluation tools and reporting guidelines. We developed an online platform of evidence-based medicine research helper using the front-end and back-end technology, which can be accessed using www.ebm-helper.cn. Currently, the online tool has included 46 scenarios for effect measure calculation and conversion, introduction of 7 evidence-based research registration platforms, 26 commonly used databases for evidence-based research and 29 quality evaluation tools and reporting guidelines. This online tool can help researchers to solve specific problems encountered in different stages of evidence-based medicine research. Promoting the application of this platform in evidence-based medicine will help researchers to use the tool scientifically and improve research efficiency.
Reporting standard system of clinical research of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is composed of ten reporting standards in the areas of the design and preparation of TCM clinical researches, researches of different types, randomized controlled trials of various interventions, systematic reviews of the trials and the translation of research evidence, which were developed by different research groups. This article systematically analyzed the current reporting standards of clinical research of TCM. Achievements and problems were found in the review so as to provide insights for the ongoing reporting standards and to assist the construction of the reporting standard system so as to improve the reporting quality of clinical researches of TCM.
The standards for reporting of diagnostic accuracy for studies in journal or conference abstracts (STARD for Abstracts) was developed for guiding the reporting of abstracts of diagnostic accuracy studies, which was published in BMJ in August 2017. The study mainly introduced and interpreted the items of STARD for Abstracts, in order to help domestic researchers to perform and report the abstracts of diagnostic accuracy studies by STARD for Abstracts.
Objective To evaluate the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in seven military medical journals. Methods Seven journals in 2007, including Medical Journal of Chinese People’s Liberation Army, Journal of South Medical University, Journal of Second Military Medical University, Journal of Third Military Medical University, Journal of Fourth Military Medical University, Bulletin of the Academy of Military of Medical Sciences and Academic Journal of PLA Postgraduate Medical School, were handsearched. We identified RCTs labeled “random” and assessed the quality of these reports using the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials (CONSORT) statement. Results We identified 99 RCTs, but found an incorrect randomized method was used in 6 RCTs. According to the items in the CONSORT statement in 93 RCTs, 62 (66.7%) RCTs described baseline demographic and clinical characteristics in each group. Sixteen (17.2%) RCTs mentioned the method of random sequence generation, with 5 (5.4%) using a computer allocation. Only 1 RCT had adequate allocation concealment. Only 9 (9.7%) RCTs used blinding, with 2 mentioning blinding, 1 using single blinding and 6 described as double-blind (2 were correct). Zero (0%) reported the sample size calculation and 1 RCT reported the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Conclusion The reporting quality of RCTs in seven journals is poor. The CONSORT statement should be used to standardize the reporting of RCTs.
In recent years, the number of randomized controlled trials using cohorts and routinely collected data (e.g., electronic health records, administrative databases, and health registries) has increased. Such trials can ease the challenges of conducting research and save cost and time. Accordingly, to standardize such trials and increase the transparency and completeness of research reports, an international panel of experts developed the CONSORT-ROUTINE (2021) reporting guideline. The reporting guideline was published in 2021 in the BMJ. To help understand and formally apply the reporting guideline and improve the overall quality of this type of study, the present paper introduced and interpreted the development process and reporting checklist of the CONSORT-ROUTINE.
With the encouragement of national policy on drug and medical device innovation, multi-center clinical trials and multi-regional clinical trials are facing an unprecedented opportunity in China. Trials with a multi-center design are far more common at present than before. However, it should be recognized there still exists shortcomings in current multi-center trials. In this paper, we summarize the problems and challenges and provide corresponding resolutions with the aim to reduce heterogeneity between study centers and avoid excessive center effects in treatment. It is urgent to develop design, implementation and reporting guidelines to improve the overall quality of multi-center clinical trials.
Objective While reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADR) and adverse drug events (AE) following Chinese medicine injection (CMI) is becoming more common, the reporting quality is of concern. Methods A checklist about the reporting quality of ADR/AE was set up, and the ADR/AE reporting of Herba Houttuyniae injection was chosen as an example. Electronic databases Chinese Journal Net (CJN) (1994-2009) and Chinese Science and Technological Journal Net (VIP) (1989-2009) were searched for target literature. Results Based on our search strategy, 210 articles were included, with 175 articles reporting single or several cases of ADR/AE following Herba Houttuyniae injection (type I report). There were 7 reports from regional or national ADR monitoring centers (type II report), and 28 summary reports from a single hospital or medical center (type III report). All 210 papers mentioned ‘adverse effect,’ ‘safety’ or related meaning words in their titles, but 199 articles did not have abstract. Patient demographic characteristics were not fully reported in these articles. In type I articles, only 97 cases (43.11%) mentioned whether patients had or did not have a history of allergies, while 128 cases (56.89%) in Type II papers and Fourteen (50%) type III papers, did not mention allergic history of patients. Only three articles (3/210, 1.43%), all of them type I, mentioned the syndrome type in Chinese medicine. None of the papers gave clear indications of the type and grade of ADR/AE of patients. Most papers did not report details of the CMI procedure, such as the drug company, product serial number, or the drug’s validity period. Data about the occurrence time and management of ADR/AE was also inadequately reported. Conclusion and recommendations The current reporting format of ADR/AE in clinical CMIs is not standardized. Much fundamental information of ADR/AE following CMI is therefore missing. A standard reporting format for ADR should be developed, and should include the following: 1) a title mentioning adverse effects and safety; 2) a structured abstract including adequate information about the patient and the disease treated, the drug used, the specific ADR/AE, physician response to the ADR/AE, and result of management; 3) demographic characteristic of the patients (gender, age, etc.); 4) clinical characteristics of patients (disease, syndrome, etc); 5) allergic history of patients; 6) diagnosis and syndrome based on Chinese medicine theory; 7) detailed information about the Chinese materia medica intervention (the manufacturer of the drug, series number, valid dates, dosage, route of administration, menstruum, dripping speed, etc.); 8) concomitant drug use; 9) time and symptoms of ADR/AE; 10) type and grading of ADR/AE; 11) physiological systems affected by ADR/AE; 12) specific treatment and prognosis for ADR/AE; 13) evidence of the cause and effect of ADR/AE; 14) any other possibility of ADR/AE. Also, a ADR/AE registration system should be established.
The American Thoracic Society Committee Task Force on Standards for Pulmonary Function had recommended a standardized reporting format for pulmonary function tests due to considerable variability in pulmonary function reports presented to end users, which might lead to potential confusion and miscommunication. This recommendation includes seven parts: overview, introduction, methods, report format, selecting and reporting reference values, grading the quality of pulmonary function tests and conclusions. This document presents a reporting format in test-specific units for spirometry, lung volumes, and diffusing capacity that can be assembled into a report appropriate for a laboratory’s practice. Recommended reference sources are updated, with especially emphasizing to adapt lower limit of normal (LLN) or z score instead of percent of prediction to estimate the abnormal results. This document provides detail and clear explanation on the recommendations, which might improve the interpretation, communication, and understanding of test results. However, parts of recommendation might not be used directly in our clinical practice owing to some specific conditions in China. We suggest to use appropriate normal predictions from Chinese population, to include small airway parameters such as mid-maximal expiratory flow for early detection of pulmonary function deterioration, and to include inspiratory flow volume curve, as well as strengthen the quality control data and figures in the report format.
ObjectiveTo systematically sort out acupuncture therapy research report specification issues and provide a reference for the selection of key problems in the specification of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis reports. MethodsComputer searches of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang Data, and VIP databases were conducted to collect studies related to reporting norms for acupuncture therapy, with a search time from inception to November 2022. Questions were constructed according to the SPIDER model and inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed. CASP was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the included literature, and a qualitative systematic evaluation thematic synthesis method was used to analyze, summarize, and integrate the questions on reporting norms for acupuncture therapy research evidence to create a pool of question entries. ResultsA total of 66 papers covering four countries were included, including 17 papers from qualitative studies and 49 papers from quantitative studies. The CASP evaluation results showed that the overall quality of the included studies was high, and the quality of the English studies was higher than that of the Chinese studies. The thematic synthesis method resulted in 22 question entries in 7 categories. The 7 categories of questions included title, abstract, preface, methods, results, discussion and other report specification questions. The 22 entries included "Is there a need to report specific types of acupuncture therapy", "Is there a need to report based on the type of original study and its number", etc. ConclusionThere are many problems with reporting norms in existing acupuncture studies, so it is necessary to collate and summarize the key issues of reporting norms for acupuncture network meta-analysis to provide a scientific and theoretical basis for the development of reporting guidelines for acupuncture network meta-analysis.