中医药治疗肝癌随机对照试验报告的质量评价

目的调查已发表的中医药治疗肝癌的随机对照试验（RCTs）的方法学质量和报告质量。方法采用计算机和手工检索的方法检索中国2004年1月-2006年6月发表的中医药治疗肝癌的RCTs报告,采用CONSORT声明修订版的评价指标对纳入的所有RCTs报告进行质量评价。结果共检索到46篇符合纳入标准的RCTs报告。其中,描述了随机分配序列的产生方法有9篇（19．57％）,无1篇描述随机分配的隐藏和样本量的估算;采用盲法的有3篇（6．52％）;报告了病例纳入、排出标准的分别为18篇（39．13％）、1篇（2．17％）;描述了受试者流程的有3篇（6．52％）,但无1篇使用了流程图;描述患者依从性的有5篇（10．87％）;对具体P值进行了描述的有6篇（13．04％）,无1篇报告了可信区间;有关不良事件描述的报告有15篇（32．61％）;在讨论部分,只有5篇（10．87％）描述了研究的局限性。结论目前中医药治疗肝癌的随机对照试验的方法学质量和报告质量与目前国际公认的CONSORT标准比较尚有差距。     

中医药治疗股骨头坏死临床研究文献的质量评价

目的:对中医药治疗股骨头坏死临床研究文献进行科研设计质量的评价。方法:计算机检索1994~2005年间中医药治疗股骨头坏死的随机对照临床研究文献,运用临床流行病学系统评价的方法,设计文献评价表,从随机化方法、研究对象的选择、样本含量、组间基线可比性、盲法及类型、随访记录、统计学处理、疗效评价标准等方面进行综合评价。结果:共有42篇文献符合纳入标准,无1篇文献说明了样本含量的估算、随机分配方案的隐匿和意图治疗分析;描述随机分组方法的占21.4%,有明确诊断标准者占66.7%,进行组间基线比较的占64.3%;仅16.7%的文献采用盲法研究,59.5%的文献叙述了具体统计学方法,92.9%的文献有明确的疗效评价标准,其中51.3%属于自拟标准。结论:中医药治疗股骨头坏死临床研究文献的质量亟待提高,应加强对科研方法学的重视,运用临床流行病学和循证医学的方法,制定规范化的科研设计方案,以使研究结论更加真实客观和具有说服力。     

中医药治疗慢性盆腔炎随机对照试验文献的质量评价

目的:评价我国自1979年以来中医药治疗慢性盆腔炎随机对照试验已发表文献的质量。方法:通过电子检索和手工检索中医药杂志(其中最早从1979年起,每种杂志均检索至2006年5月)。纳入凡文中有“随机”字样或“随机分组”,“随机对照”的以慢性盆腔炎为目标疾病的研究,由两名研究者独立进行文献选择和资料提取工作,遵循循证医学的原则和文献系统性评价质量评价的原则,对文献质量进行分析评价。纳入试验的方法学质量采用Jadad评分标准与随机分配隐藏。结果:共检索到文献2050篇,纳入文献166篇。在166篇文献中,23篇交待了随机方法,占13.9%;没有1篇提到分配隐匿;有诊断标准的108篇,占65.1%;明确指出组间有可比性的78篇,占47.0%;没有1篇提到样本含量估算依据;运用盲法的有6篇,采用双盲的有2篇,占1.2%;2篇有失访,但均未进行意向治疗分析(intentioxito-treat,ITT)处理;说明具体统计方法78篇,占47.0%;19篇文献进行随访,占11.5%;26篇文献提及不良反应,占15.7%。结论:迄今我国慢性盆腔炎的中医药研究中,高质量的RCT研究数量较少,研究质量的总体水平亟待提高。一些先进的科研方法还没有得到应用或广泛的应用。     

中医药治疗冠心病的临床随机对照试验文献的质量分析

目的：评价中医药治疗冠心病的临床随机对照试验（RCT）文献的质量。方法：手工检索83种中医类杂志（1977-2002年6月）。纳入标准：中医药治疗冠心病的临床随机对照试验。结果：符合纳入标准的文献共675篇。（1）交待了随机分配方法的58篇（8.59%);(2)提到了诊断标准及研究纳入标准的637篇（94.37%);(3)无一篇提到分配隐匿;（4）使用了盲法的64篇（9.48%)。采用双盲的29篇（4.29%)。单盲的35篇（5.19%);(5)提到基线可比性的563篇（83.41%);(6)无一篇提到样本含量的估算依据;（7）12个临床研究中病人丢失,但无一在结果统计中进行intention-to-treat处理;（8）统计方法错误的24篇,占3.56%;有统计结果但没有说明方法的394篇。占58.37%;结论;迄今为止临床随机对照实试在有关中医药治疗冠心病的研究中还没有被广泛运用。我们在这一领域的临床随机对照实验中还很难见到分配隐匿,样本的估算依据。盲法与intention-to-treat的运用。一些文章还混淆了随机分配与随机抽样的概念,正确的统计学方法的运用率还比较低。总的看来,中医药治疗冠心病的RCT试验文献的质量亟待提高。     

采用CONSORT和STRICTA评价针刺治疗单纯性肥胖症随机对照试验报告质量

目的 采用CONSORT声明和STRICTA标准评价国内针刺治疗单纯性肥胖症临床随机对照试验质量.方法 系统检索CNKI、CBM、VIP和万方4个数据库,手工检索所有中文针灸期刊、中医药核心期刊,纳入针刺治疗单纯性肥胖症的随机对照试验,并采用国际公认的CONSORT声明和报告针刺临床试验中干预措施的国际标准(STRICTA)进行报告质量评价.结果 共纳入112篇文献.根据CONSORT条目,在针刺治疗单纯性肥胖症的报告中,89篇(79.46%)描述了各组的基线情况和临床特征;33篇(29.46%)正确描述了产生随机分配序列的方法;1篇(0.89%)采用盲法,为单盲;尚没有文献提及分配隐藏、样本含量计算及意向治疗(ITT)分析法.根据STRICTA,7篇(6.25%)文献提及用针数目;67篇(59.82%)提及针具型号,24篇(21.43%)提及针刺深度;1篇(0.89%)报告了治疗师的资历.结论 目前针刺治疗单纯性肥胖症的研究报告质量普遍较低.今后应采用国际公认的CONSORT声明和STRICTA标准对针刺临床试验进行规范报告.     

中医药治疗脂溢性皮炎随机对照试验报告的质量评价

【目的】 评价中医药治疗脂溢性皮炎随机对照试验（RCT）的文献质量，了解其临床随机对照试验的现状，以提高其临床研究质量。【方法】 检索中国知网（CNKI）、维普（VIP）中文科技期刊数据库、万方（Wanfang）数据库、中国生物医学文献服务系统（SinoMed）中公开发表的关于中医药治疗脂溢性皮炎的RCT，由2名研究人员根据纳入和排除标准对文献进行独立筛选，并使用 CONSORT 声明和改良 Jadad 量表对报告质量进行评估。【结果】 共纳入 102 篇 RCT。对纳入的 102 篇 RCT 的CONSORT声明评估结果如下：31篇（30.39%）描述了具体随机方法，无研究文献描述分配隐藏方法，只有1篇文献提及“盲法”，但未描述盲法的具体实施，3 篇（2.94%）文献记录了病例脱落情况，59篇（57.84%）文献报道了不良反应，所有报告均未提及样本量估算、临床试验注册情况、相关的研究方案和资助情况。对纳入的102篇RCT的改良Jadad量表评估结果显示：3篇（2.94%）报告 ≥ 4分，99篇（97.06％）报告 ≤ 3分。【结论】 目前国内有关中医药治疗脂溢性皮炎RCT报告的质量普遍     

采用CONSORT和STRICTA评价近5年针刺治疗偏头痛随机对照试验

目的采用试验报告统一标准(CONSORT)和针刺临床试验干预措施报告的标准(STRICTA)评价针刺治疗偏头痛随机对照试验(RCT)中英文文献的报告质量。 方法计算机检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、维普期刊资源整合服务平台(VJIP)数据库,文种限制为中英文,检索时限为2012年1月至2017年4月。由2位评价者根据纳入与排除标准独立进行文献筛选,并采用国际公认的CONSORT声明和STRICTA标准评价报告质量。 结果最终纳入18篇文献,根据CONSORT条目,15篇(83.33%)描述各组的基线情况和临床特征;8篇(44.44%)提及产生随机分配序列的方法;10篇(55.56%)描述分配方案隐藏;10篇(55.56%)采用盲法;6篇(33.33%)提及样本含量的计算。根据STRICTA条目,8篇(44.44%)文献提及针刺反应;有11篇(61.11%)提及针刺深度;5篇文献(27.78%)报告治疗师的资历,亦提及医师的临床实践时间。 结论研究纳入的针刺治疗偏头痛中英文文献,根据CONSORT声明和STRICTA标准的条目,研究报告质量仍然存在不少问题。今后应提倡采用国际公认的CONSORT声明和STRICTA标准对针刺治疗的RCT进行规范报告。     

中医药治疗晚期胃癌文献的质量评价及疗效分析

目的:评价中医药治疗晚期胃癌临床试验/观察类文献的文献质量,对疗效指标的参考标准及结果简要评述。方法:检索2005-2010年中医药治疗晚期胃癌的国内文献,阅读全文及收集信息,评价文献质量并行疗效结果的分析。结果:纳入文献75篇,其中观察类文献12篇,占16%;对照试验文献63篇,占84%。9篇有临床诊断的参考标准,占12%;2篇有中医证型的辨证标准,占2.7%;6篇说明了是否存在与中药治疗相关的副性事件,占8%。45篇对照文献说明组间基线均衡,占71.4%;无1篇文献行样本含量的估算。对疗效结果的统计显示:24篇文献以生存期为疗效判定指标,占32%,中位生存期7.4～19个月;63篇文献分析有效率或疾病控制率,占84%,以WHO标准为疗效判定标准的有效率为7.69%～67.8%。51篇评价化疗不良反应,占68%。12篇分析中医证候,占16%;7篇以生活质量为评价标准,占9.3%。结论:中医药治疗晚期胃癌文献的研究设计不严密,统计学方法运用欠严谨,有待进一步提高。中医药治疗晚期胃癌具有一定疗效,但疗效评价标准不一,疗效结果难以重复,导致可信度降低。     

中医药治疗更年期综合征随机对照试验文献的质量评价

目的：评价国内中医药治疗更年期综合征随机对照试验已发表文献的质量.方法：电子、手工检索获得发表的关于中医药治疗更年期综合征的随机对照试验或半随机对照试验或自称是随机对照试验无论是否采用盲法的文献,由两名研究者独立进行文献选择和资料提取工作,遵循循证医学的原则和文献系统性评价质量评价的原则,对文献质量进行分析评价.纳入试验的方法学质量采用Jadad评分标准与随机分配隐藏.结果：共51篇关于中医药治疗更年期综合征的随机对照试验满足纳入标准,2篇双盲试验被评为高质量试验,其余均为低质量.51篇文献中指出了具体随机方法的占7.9%,没有1篇提到分配隐匿;有明确诊断标准的占62.7%,明确疗效评价标准出处者占29.4%,明确指出组间有可比性的占56.9%,运用盲法的占7.8%,说明选择相应的统计学方法的依据或理由的占7.8%.结论：中医药治疗更年期综合征的随机对照研究中,高质量的随机对照试验较少,研究质量的总体水平亟待提高,应努力开展有资金资助的大样本、多中心、严格的前瞻性随机对照试验.     

中医药治疗更年期综合征随机对照试验文献的质量评价

目的:评价国内中医药治疗更年期综合征随机对照试验已发表文献的质量.方法:电子、手工检索获得发表的关于中医药治疗更年期综合征的随机对照试验或半随机对照试验或自称是随机对照试验无论是否采用盲法的文献,由两名研究者独立进行文献选择和资料提取工作,遵循循证医学的原则和文献系统性评价质量评价的原则,对文献质量进行分析评价.纳入试验的方法学质量采用Jadad评分标准与随机分配隐藏.结果:共51篇关于中医药治疗更年期综合征的随机对照试验满足纳入标准,2篇双盲试验被评为高质量试验,其余均为低质量.51篇文献中指出了具体随机方法的占7.9%,没有1篇提到分配隐匿;有明确诊断标准的占62.7%,明确疗效评价标准出处者占29.4%,明确指出组间有可比性的占56.9%,运用盲法的占7.8%,说明选择相应的统计学方法的依据或理由的占7.8%.结论:中医药治疗更年期综合征的随机对照研究中,高质量的随机对照试验较少,研究质量的总体水平亟待提高,应努力开展有资金资助的大样本、多中心、严格的前瞻性随机对照试验.     

稳心颗粒治疗心房颤动的随机对照试验质量评价

目的:调查稳心颗粒治疗房颤随机对照试验(RCT)文献质量。方法:采用Jadad评分量表、CONSORT标准进行评价。结果:共检索到符合纳入标准的RCT文献66篇。采用Jadad量表评分,其中4分2篇,3分1篇,2分54篇,1分7篇,0分2篇。仅2篇文章描述采用随机数字表分组,无1例报道如何执行随机隐藏,1篇文章中提及盲法,文章中提及失访情况的有59篇(89.4%),按照CONSORT标准,仅6篇(9.1%)描述了如何产生随机序列,其中4篇(6.1%)为半随机,19篇(28.8%)有纳入标准,有6篇(9.1%)文章提及随访记录,51篇(77.3%)描写了不良事件,均未进行样本含量计算、意向性分析和分层分析,均未报道伦理审查和知情同意情况。结论:目前稳心颗粒治疗房颤的临床研究较多,在研究设计方法、文章报告全面性、质量等方面有待提高。     

Quality of randomized controlled trials in acupuncture treatment of hepatitis B virus infection--a systematic review

The purpose of this work was to evaluate the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with acupuncture treatment for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. A systematic review of the literature for clinical trials was performed up to September 2008. RCTs assessing acupuncture point stimulation for patients with HBV infection were considered for inclusion. The search identified 70 relevant trials meeting the inclusion. The quality of each trial was assessed using the revised Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials (CONSORT) statement, facilitating critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs by providing guidance to authors; the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) recommendations, acting as an extension of the CONSORT guidelines for the specific requirements of acupuncture studies; and the Jadad scale, widely used in different settings to assess methodological quality. All trials were reported "randomization", but only 2 mentioned the methods. None reported allocation concealment, a method used to keep clinicians and participants unaware of upcoming assignments. None reported blinding. 3 studies described the number of withdrawals/dropouts, while none used the analysis of "intention to treat". The reported items of the STRICTA recommendations were assigned for 65% (13 out of 20). Only 2 studies had a high quality Jadad score. The results from our work show that the quality was low caused by their methodological flaws and inadequate reports. Further rigorous clinical trials for HBV infection would be necessary to evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture.     

中医药治疗阿尔茨海默病随机对照试验的系统评价

目的:系统评价中医药治疗阿尔茨海默病的临床疗效及安全性。方法:计算机检索Pubmed、CBM、VIP、CNKI检索系统,手工检索相关期刊及灰色文献,纳入中医药治疗阿尔茨海默病的随机对照试验(RCT)。根据随机分配方法、随机方案隐藏、盲法和意向性治疗分析逐个评价纳入研究的质量。2位研究员独立提取资料、评价质量。采用Review Manager 4.3软件进行统计分析。结果:纳入7项符合纳入标准的随机对照试验包括678例患者,均以中文发表。均为低质量试验。结果显示:①总有效率:共纳入7项RCT,中药治疗组总有效率均高于对照组。②MMSE评分:共纳入3项RCT,结果显示,2项RCT研究中药治疗组MMSE评分优于对照组。③ADL评分:共纳入2项RCT,1项RCT显示中药治疗组ADL评分低于对照组。④HDS评分:共纳入3项RCT,2项RCT显示治疗组ADAS-cog评分高于对照组。⑤MQ评分:共纳入1项RCT研究,治疗后MQ评分中药治疗组明显优于对照组。⑥所纳入文献均未发现与中药相关严重的不良反应。结论:中医药可改善阿尔茨海默病患者临床症状、缓解病情,无明显严重不良反应。由于纳入试验的方法学质量普遍偏低,缺乏重要的终点指标,其临床有效性和安全性尚需大量高质量研究支持。     

Misuse of randomization: a review of Chinese randomized trials of herbal medicines for chronic hepatitis B

The quality of randomization of Chinese randomized trials on herbal medicines for hepatitis B was assessed. Search strategy and inclusion criteria were based on the published protocol. One hundred and seventy-six randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving 20,452 patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection were identified that tested Chinese medicinal herbs. They were published in 49 Chinese journals. Only 10% (18/176) of the studies reported the method by which they randomized patients. Only two reported allocation concealment and were considered as adequate. Twenty percent (30/150) of the studies were imbalanced at the 0.05 level of probability for the two treatments and 13.3% (20/150) imbalanced at the 0.01 level in the randomization. It is suggested that there may exist misunderstanding of the concept and the misuse of randomization based on the review.     

Comparison of effectiveness and safety between granules and decoction of Chinese herbal medicine: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials

Background

The clinical use of Chinese herbal medicine granules is gradually increasing. However, there is still no systematic review comparing the effectiveness and safety of granules with the more traditional method of herbal decoctions.

Method

A literature search was conducted using China National Knowledge Infrastructure Databases (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), China Biomedical Database web (CBM), Wanfang Database, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library until March 10, 2011. Clinical controlled trials (CCTs) including randomized trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness and safety between Chinese herbal medicine granules and decoction were included. Two authors conducted the literature searches, and extracted data independently. The assessment of methodological quality of RCTs was based on the risk of bias from the Cochrane Handbook, and the main outcome data of trials were analyzed by using RevMan 5.0 software. Risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as effect measure.

Results

56 clinical trials (n = 9748) including 42 RCTs and 14 CCTs were included, and all trials were conducted in China and published in Chinese literature. 40 types of diseases and 15 syndromes of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) were reported. Granules were provided by pharmaceutical companies in 13 trials. The included RCTs were of generally low methodological quality: 7 trials reported adequate randomization methods, and 2 of these reported allocation concealment. 10 trials used blinding, of which 5 trials used placebo which were delivered double blind (blinded participants and practitioners). 98.2% (55/56) of studies showed that there was no significant statistical difference between granules and decoctions of Chinese herbal medicine for their effectiveness. No severe adverse effects in either group were reported.

Conclusions

Due to the poor methodological quality of most of the included trials, it is not possible to reach a definitive conclusion whether both Chinese herbal medicine granules and decoctions have the same degree of effectiveness and safety in clinical practice, but this preliminary evidence supports the continued use of granules in clinical practice and research. Standardization of granules and further more rigorous pharmacological, toxicological and clinical studies are needed to demonstrate the equivalence with decoctions.     

针灸治疗带状疱疹文献质量评价与施治规律探讨

目的：对针灸治疗带状疤疹的临床研究文献进行质量评价。方法：电子检索1994-2006年研究文献。按照临床流行病学和循证医学的原则和方法，对临床研究类型及方法学、一般情况、疾病诊断及纳入和排除标准、样本含量估计、治疗情况、疗效判定标准、随谚等方面进行评价。结果：在399篇纳入文献中，真正随机对照试验仅8个；半随机对照试验20个；非随机同期对照试验66个；叙述性研究共277个；明确诊断标准70篇；提及纳入或排除标准的16篇；明确疗效标准的287篇；107篇文献记录随访；2篇描述有卫生经济学指标；9篇文献提及不良反应。结论：目前迫切需要正确实施随机、隐藏及盲法、安慰剂对照、有公认诊断及疗效评价标准、进行安全性评价、合理设计随访的随机对照试验研究。同时通过文献初步探讨针灸治疗带状疱疹的施治规律是以阿是穴刺络放血拔罐为主。     

RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS ON ACUPUNCTURE PUBLISHED IN CHINESE JOURNALS:A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW

Objective: To systematically evaluate the number and quality of randomized clinical trials(RCTs) on acupuncture published in Chinese journals.Methods: We systematically searched the four main electronic Chinese databases(CNKI, VIP, CBM, Wanfang) from their inception in January 2013 to identify RCTs on acupuncture(including manual and electronic acupuncture), to bibliometrically analyze the RCTs, and to assess methodological quality of the RCTs.Results: A total of 7085 RCTs(involving 698540 participants) were published from 1982 to 2013 in Chinese literature.The top three disease systems identified in the included trials were nervous system(39.5%), musculoskeletal system and connective tissue(21.3%), and genitourinary system(6.2%) according to ICD-10.The 7085 acupuncture trials were compared with no treatment(51 trials, 0.7%), sham-acupuncture(62 trials, 0.9%), conventional treatment(728 trials, 10.3%), other traditionalChinese medicine(911 trials, 12.9%), as well as acupuncture plus conventional treatment versus conventional treatment(946 trials, 13.4%), acupuncture plus one treatment versus another treatment(1493 trials, 21.7%), acupuncture plus one treatment versus acupuncture alone(915 trials, 12.9%).In addition, 1135 trials(16.0%) were two-armed RCTs, in which acupuncture applied in both groups.A total of 844 trials(11.9%) were three or more-armed RCTs.Forty-two trials(0.6%) of 7085 RCTs clearly defined primary and secondary outcomes, 6803(96.0%) reported clinical relevant outcomes, 659(9.3%) reported surrogate outcomes, 497(7.0%) reported safety outcomes.For methodological quality, 2658(37.5%) RCTs reported randomization methods, 121(1.7%) reported allocation concealment methods, 141(2.0%) applied blinding, and only 28(0.4%) described sample size calculation.Conclusion: The number of RCTs on acupuncture was substantial and increasing in China, and acupuncture was most frequently applied to nervous, musculoskeletal and connective tissue diseases.However, the methodological quality of the trials is still low.We recommend that the reports of future RCTs on acupuncture will be based on CONSORT and STRCTA.