中文期刊发表的中医药系统评价/Meta分析现状调查

目的调查国内中文期刊发表的中医药系统评价/Meta分析文献的质量。方法电子检索1995年1月到2006年12月的CNKI和CBM,筛选中医药的系统评价、Meta分析全文,提取有关中医特色、治疗和对照干预措施的详细资料进行分析评价,并调查文献是否采用QUOROM声明报道结果。结果共纳入文献111篇,其中预防、不良反应、危险因素及先兆症各1篇,理化指标2篇,疗效及安全性评价106篇。涉及42个病种,报道脑血管疾病的文献41篇。干预措施为中医药者25篇,针灸者12篇。对照组:未设对照者2篇;未描述对照组干预措施者15篇;阳性药物对照50篇(其中西药26篇,中药12篇,中药 西药12篇);空白对照14篇;基础对照17篇;假针灸、穴位注射等4篇;安慰剂对照5篇;空白对照14篇及“互为对照”4篇。对照组和部分研究治疗组的干预措施种类均多。每篇文献纳入RCT1～35篇不等,其中24个研究纳入CCT。111篇文献在Cochrane协作网注册者仅14篇。有16篇未对纳入RCT进行质量评价,有22篇仅对纳入RCT进行简单不规范的评价。无一篇文献采用QUOROM声明报道结果。结论应重视提高中医药系统评价的质量。根据中医药特点,选题范围不宜过宽,药物选择不宜过多,注意中药的目标适应病证,应重视对干预措施的评价。系统评价应注意由临床工作者和方法学研究者共同完成,才能做出质量高又具中医特色的评价。     

国内期刊发表的中医药系统评价/Meta分析的现状分析

目的了解目前中文期刊发表的中医药系统评价/Meta分析的现状。方法计算机检索中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM,1978～2009.7.31),查找相关的中医药系统评价/Meta分析。对符合纳入标准的文献,根据研究目的提取相关信息,以发表年限、发表期刊、作者地区、作者数及发表篇数、病种和干预措施为分析指标,采用SPSS 15.0软件进行描述性分析。结果共纳入245篇文献。其中中文238篇,英文7篇,分别发表于117种期刊,发表年限在1998～2008年,发文量呈加速增长趋势。该245篇文献的第一作者除1篇来自德国外,其余均来自国内24个省(自治区、直辖市);每篇文献作者数在1～11人不等;共有186人以第一作者身份发表过文章,发表篇数在1～29篇不等。文献涉及病种按国际疾病分类第十版(ICD-10)分类,共涉及16类。干预措施为药物者218篇(上市药物106篇,自拟方25篇,既涉及上市药又涉及自拟方70篇,未报告具体的干预措施17篇),占89%;非药物者27篇(针灸26篇,推拿1篇),占11%。药物干预中自拟方和上市药/自拟方绝大多数(95.8%)进行了不恰当的合并分析。结论循证医学在国内中医领域的推广面已较广,中医药系统评价/Meta分析文献量呈加速增长的趋势,其涉及病种较好地覆盖了当前中医治疗的优势病种,但存在地区不平衡。今后药物干预的系统评价/Meta分析应更多针对中成药和单味药而非自拟方,并应更多关注优势病种和优势药物;非药物干预采用针灸时也要注意控制临床异质性。     

中医药临床实践指南和专家共识引用系统评价/Meta分析现况调查

目的 对中医药临床实践指南和专家共识引用系统评价/Meta分析证据的情况进行调查.方法 计算机检索PubMed、CNKI、CBM和WanFang Data数据库,搜集中医药指南和共识,检索时限为2009年1月1日至2018年12月31日.由两位研究者独立筛选文献和提取信息后,分析引文特征并汇总.结果 共纳人142部中医...     

健康教育对腰痛干预疗效的系统评价和Meta分析

目的:系统评价健康教育对腰痛患者疼痛、功能性活动及生活质量的临床效果。方法:计算机检索EMBASE、Web of Science、PubMed/Medline、The Cochrane Library、VIP、CNKI和WanFang Data数据库,搜索时限从2009年1月~2019年9月。由两名评价员独立筛选文献、提取数据并评价纳入研究的方法学质量,以RevMan 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果:最终纳入27个研究,共2701例患者。Meta结果显示与对照组相比:①健康教育联合运动疗法在改善腰痛患者疼痛和功能障碍方面具有显著优势,NPRS评分[MD=-1.78,95%CI(-2.67,-0.89),P<0.01]、RMDQ评分[MD=-4.72,95%CI(-7.70,-0.84),P=0.01];②健康教育联合常规治疗在改善疼痛方面并无显著性差异,VAS评分[MD=-0.49,95%CI(-1.04,0.07),P=0.09],但在改善功能障碍方面具有优势,RMDQ评分[MD=-0.97,95%CI(-1.91,-0.02),P=0.04];③加强健康教育在疼痛改善方面具有优势,VAS评分[MD=-0.52,95%CI(-0.93,-0.11),P=0.01]、NPRS评分[MD=-0.41,95%CI(-0.75,-0.08),P=0.01],在改善功能障碍方面均无优势。所有研究在改善生活质量方面均无优势。结论:运动疗法或常规治疗基础上增加健康教育更有利于腰痛患者疼痛缓解,并能更好的改善因腰痛导致的功能障碍。且加强健康教育可能更加有效。受纳入研究数量和质量的限制,以上述结论尚待更多高质量研究予以验证。     

国内护理领域系统评价／Meta分析证据质量如何？——基于GRADE指南的评价

目的采用GRADE系统对我国护理领域现有系统评价／Meta分析的结局指标进行证据质量评价,以了解其证据质量现状,促进证据质幢评价在系统评价中的应用。方法采用GRADEpro3．6软件对所纳入结局指标进行证据质量的录入和量化分级。并在评价过程中仔细分析并详细描述每一项影响证据质量的升、降级因素。结果本研究共评定了188条结局指标,其高、中、低、极低质量证据分别占2．7％、27．1％、51．1％和19．1％,低级别证据占多数。结论我国现有护理领域系统评价／Meta分析的证据质量不高,亟待改进。系统评价制作者需严格遵守系统评价制作的方法学规范,同样需要对每个研究指标进行证据质量评价,并予以完整报道;     

中医药治疗原发性高血压系统评价的再评价

目的评价中医药治疗原发性高血压系统评价的方法学偏倚及其结论的可靠程度。方法计算机检索PubMed、EMbase、The Cochrane Library(2014年第4期)、CBM、CNKI和WanFang Data数据库,查找中医药治疗原发性高血压的系统评价,检索时限均为从建库至2014年4月30日。采用AMSTAR工具评价纳入系统评价的方法学质量,并基于GRADE方法对系统评价纳入的结局指标进行证据质量分级。结果共纳入12个系统评价,包含31个结局指标,其中11个系统评价比较了中医药联合西药对比西药治疗原发性高血压的疗效,9个采用了Jadad量表作为系统评价纳入原始研究的方法学质量评估工具。AMSTAR工具评价结果显示,11个条目中,存在问题最多的是条目1"是否提供了前期设计方案"(12个未提供),其次是条目11"是否说明相关利益冲突"(9个未说明)和条目6"是否描述纳入研究的特征"(6个未描述)。GRADE分级结果显示:29个结局指标的证据质量均为低或极低,导致降级最主要因素为局限性(31个结局指标),其次为不精确(13个结局指标)和不一致(12个结局指标)。结论当前针对中医药治疗原发性高血压系统评价的方法学质量总体较差,结论的证据水平较低,对患者终点结局的关注程度不足。因此,临床医生在使用这些证据进行临床决策时尚需谨慎。     

中医药系统评价中的异质性分析与处理

目的 对国内发表的中医药系统评价/Meta 分析中的异质性问题进行分析,了解异质性的来源、类别及严重程度,探讨中医药系统评价中异质性的正确处理方法。 方法 计算机检索CBM、CNKI、VIP 等中文数据库及手检《中国循证医学杂志》,检索截止时间为2008 年。由两位研究者按照纳入与排除标准独立提取资料并对有关异质性的问题进行评价。若遇分歧,讨论解决。 结果 共纳入115 个中医药系统评价/Meta 分析,涉及17 类疾病,其中以心血管疾病最多（36,31.3%）。有41 个（35.65%）中医药系统评价混合纳入了两种或两种以上设计类型的原始研究;有62 个（53.91%）系统评价所纳入研究的干预措施不一致,有60 个（52.17%）系统评价中的对照措施不一致;另有10 个（8.7%）系统评价的异质性处理方法不当。 结论 中医药系统评价/Meta 分析中异质性问题普遍存在,尤以临床异质性最为突出。异质性问题处置不当,会直接影响中医药系统评价的质量。     

国内公共卫生研究领域系统评价/Meta分析的质量评价

目的评价国内发表的公共卫生领域6种重要疾病防治的系统评价/Meta分析的方法学和发表质量。方法计算机检索中国期刊全文数据库、万方医药期刊数据库、维普中文科技期刊全文数据库及中国生物医学文献数据库,检索时间从建库至2010年6月,查找涉及肿瘤、脑血管疾病、心血管疾病、乙肝、结核病以及艾滋病等6种重要疾病防治的系统评价或Meta分析的中文文献,由两名研究人员独立筛查文献,并采用OQAQ和PRISMA评价量表对文献的方法学质量和发表质量进行评价,而后交叉核对,如遇分歧讨论解决。结果共纳入139篇文献,包括32篇系统评价,107篇Meta分析,文献方法学质量评分最高6.5分,最低1.5分,平均4.66±0.92分。无一篇文献符合全部9个条目的要求,主要存在资料检索不全面、资料的选择偏倚控制不足、对纳入的原始研究缺乏严格的质量评价等问题。报告质量评分平均为15.28±2.91分,其主要问题表现在摘要、资料收集及分析方法、偏倚控制及总结等方面报道不全面。结论目前国内公卫研究领域已发表的肿瘤、心脑血管疾病等6种重要疾病防治的系统评价/Meta分析的方法学质量及报告质量尚存在不同程度的问题,需要进一步提高方法学水平和规范发表。     

对系统评价/Meta分析报告规范的系统评价

目的全面收集系统评价/Meta分析的报告规范并对其进行评价,为系统评价/Meta分析的规范化发表及传播提供帮助。方法电子检索Ovid MEDLINE(1996～2010)及EMbase(截至2010年4月),纳入系统评价/Meta分析报告规范的文献,检索词包括guideline、report、systematic reviews、meta-analyses。通过阅读文题及摘要,排除无明显相关性的文献(针对具体疾病的系统评价,某一疾病的临床指南,以及仅讨论如何进行系统评价而未关注如何进行系统评价的报道等),而后进一步阅读全文,从纳入文献中提取如何报告系统评价/Meta分析的部分,并据其纳入原始研究设计的类型如随机对照试验、观察性研究、诊断性试验进行分类。结果初检获得285篇文献,最终纳入26篇文献。其中随机对照试验的系统评价/Meta分析报告规范有8篇,非随机对照试验(观察性研究)的系统评价/Meta分析报告规范2篇,诊断性试验的系统评价/Meta分析报告规范0篇,动物实验的系统评价/Meta分析报告规范1篇,针对系统评价/Meta分析的检索策略的报告规范2篇,评估系统评价/Meta分析质量的5篇,研究报告规范对系统评价/Meta分析质量影响的6篇。有2个指南更新。结论目前系统评价/Meta分析报告规范数量较多,其中QUOROM及其更新版本PRISMA被众多期刊广泛采纳。报告规范有利于提高系统评价和Meta分析的报告质量,尚需制定针对具体专业系统评价/Meta分析的报告规范。     

中医药临床有效性证据库构建与应用

阐述中医药临床有效性证据库(TCM-CED)的构建与应用,为中医药研究证据链提供支持.构建过程主要包括:专家团队组建、TCM-CED功能模块设计、证据采集、质量控制等.TCM-CED应用内容包括:中成药系统评价/Meta分析自动生成、中医药优势病种证据报告自动生成、中成药证据指数自动运算、优化中医药研究结局指标、中医药...     

The effect of Chinese herbal medicine on hemorrhagic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundChinese herbal medicine (CHM) has been widely used in the treatment of hemorrhagic shock (HS) in China. Many controlled trials have been undertaken to investigate its efficacy.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of CHM for Hemorrhagic Shock patients.MethodsWe screening the Web of ScienceDirect database, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, China Biomedical Database web (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and WanFang database (WF), from inception to January 2015. All the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared CHM plus conventional therapy with conventional therapy alone for HS patients were included. Meta-analysis on included studies was performed using fixed-effects model with RevMan 5.2. Risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was used as effect measure. STATA 12.0 was used for publication bias.ResultsFifteen RCTs involving 1076 participants were included in the meta-analysis. CHM combined with conventional therapy was tested to be more effective in reduce mortality (RR = 0.24, 95%CI:0.13–0.46, P < 0.0001), reduce the incidence of MODS (RR = 0.47, 95%CI: 0.34–0.66,P < 0.00001), symptomatic improvement: increase blood pressure (BP) (MD = 8.83, 95%CI:6.82–10.84,P < 0.00001), regulate heart rate (MD = −7.6,95%CI:−9.17 to −6.02,P < 0.00001), increase urine volume (MD = 7.26, 95%CI:5.00–9.53, P < 0.00001), compared with conventional therapy alone. No serious adverse events were reported.ConclusionsCHM combined with conventional therapy seems to be more effective on HS patients. However, the analysis results should be interpreted with caution due to the low methodological quality of the included trials. Future, the rigorously designed, high methodological quality, multicenter and large-scale trials are needed to confirm these conclusions.     

中药熏蒸治疗肩手综合征的系统评价

目的：系统评价中药熏蒸治疗肩手综合征的临床疗效。方法：计算机搜索The Cochrane Library、EMbase、PubMed、CNKI、CBM、WanFang Data及VIP 数据库,寻找中药熏蒸治疗肩手综合征的随机对照试验（RCT）,搜索时间范围从数据库构建到2018年3月。由2位评估员根据纳入与排除标准独立进行文献筛选、资料提取及纳入研究的偏倚风险评估后,使用RevMan5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果：最终纳入13个研究,共880名患者。Meta分析结果显示：中药熏蒸组在治疗有效率［RR=1.23,95%CI（1.15,1.32）,P＜0.01］、FMA评分［MD= 8.1,95%CI（4.95,11.25）,P＜0.01］、VAS评分［MD= -1.74,95%CI（-2.23,-1.25）,P＜0.01］及肩关节活动度［MD =-0.64,95%CI（-0.89,-0.38）,P＜0.01］方面优于对照组,差异均有统计学意义;但两者在FMA评分的亚组干预2～3周中差异无统计学意义［MD= 7.02,95%CI（-1.00,15.05）,P=0.09］。结论：中药熏蒸可以改善肩手综合征患者的上肢运动功能,减轻疼痛,改善肩关节活动度。由于所包含研究的数量和质量的限制,需要更多的大样本高质量研究来验证上述结论。     

Tanreqing injection for acute bronchitis disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BackgroundAcute bronchitis (AB) is one of the common diseases. Tanreqing injection (TRQ) was widely used to treat patients with acute bronchitis, and many randomized controlled trials have been conducted to investigate its efficacy.ObjectiveThe purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TRQ for AB.MethodsEight English and Chinese electronic databases, up to October 2014, were searched to identify randomized controlled trials on TRQ for AB. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the quality of each trial by using Cochrane handbook. Meta-analysis was carried out by using Review Manager software.ResultA total of 49 trials with 5131 participants were collected. Data of three main outcomes were pooled and analyzed as following: (1) effective rates: TRQ versus antibiotics (RR 1.12; 95% CI 1.05, 1.18; P = 0.0002); TRQ plus antiviral drugs versus antiviral drugs (RR: 5.12; 95% CI 3.03, 8.66; P < 0.00001); TRQ plus antibiotics versus antibiotics (RR 3.46; 95% CI 2.59, 4.62; P < 0.00001); TRQ versus antibiotics plus antiviral drugs (RR 2.03; 95% CI 1.10, 3.74; P = 0.02); TRQ plus conventional therapy versus conventional therapy alone (RR 1.21; 95% CI 1.15, 1.27; P < 0.00001). (2) Time for fever resolution: TRQ plus antiviral drugs versus antiviral drugs (MD: −1.08; 95% CI −1.59, −0.57; P < 0.00001); TRQ plus antibiotics versus antibiotics (MD −1.33; 95% CI −1.81, −0.86; P < 0.00001); TRQ versus antibiotics plus antiviral drugs (MD −0.88; 95% CI −1.25, −0.51; P < 0.00001); TRQ plus conventional therapy versus conventional therapy alone (MD −1.06; 95% CI −1.13, −0.98; P < 0.00001). (3) Resolution of cough: TRQ plus antiviral drugs versus antiviral drugs (MD: −2.09; 95% CI −3.11, −1.43; P < 0.00001); TRQ plus antibiotics versus antibiotics (MD: −2.65; 95% CI −2.88, −2.42; P < 0.00001); TRQ plus conventional therapy versus conventional therapy alone (MD −1.84; 95% CI −2.85, −0.83; P = 0.0003). Four trials described the adverse drug reactions of TRQ, while no severe adverse drug reactions reported.ConclusionsAs a therapy for AB, TRQ has potentially beneficial effect in improving effective rates, reducing the time to resolution of fever, cough, crackles and absorption of shadows on X-ray. However, due to the limitations of methodological quality of the included trials, it is difficult to make a conclusive recommendation about TRQ treating patients with AB. Further rigorous clinical trials are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TRQ.     

Therapeutic effects and safety of oral Chinese patent medicine for COVID-19: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

IntroductionChinese patent medicine (CPM) is an indispensable part of traditional Chinese medicine. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) manifests is an acute respiratory infectious disease. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the therapeutic effects and safety of oral CPM for COVID-19.MethodsWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that tested oral CPM for the treatment of COVID-19 identified from publications in CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, Web of Science, SinoMed, PubMed, Embase, BioRxiv, MedRxiv and arXiv before November 2nd, 2020. The risk of bias for each trial was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. RevMan 5.4 software was used for data analyses. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the online GRADEpro tool.ResultsSeven RCTs including 1079 participants were identified. The overall bias was assessed as “-high risk of bias” for all included trials. Oral CPM investigated were: Lianhua Qingwen capsule/granules (LHQW), Jinhua Qinggan granules (JHQG), Huoxiang Zhengqi dripping pills (HXZQ), Toujie Quwen granules (TJQW) and Lianhua Qingke granules (LHQK). Compared with conventional western therapy alone for people with COVID-19: regarding the main outcomes, the results showed that oral CPM combined with conventional western therapy improved cure rate (RR = 1.20, 95 % CI 1.04–1.38, involving LHQW and TJQW), reduced aggravation rate (RR = 0.50, 95 % CI 0.29 – 0.85, involving LHQW, JHQG, LHQK and TJQW); with regard to additional outcomes, the results showed that add-on oral CPM shortened the duration of fever, cough and fatigue, improved the recovery rate of cough and fatigue, and increased the improvement and recovery rate of chest CT manifestations. There were some differences in therapeutic effects among various CPMs for the same COVID-19 outcome. The use of TJQW and LHQG appeared not to increase the risk of adverse events, but JHQG may cause mild diarrhea.ConclusionLow-certainty or very low-certainty evidence demonstrated that oral CPM may have add-on potential therapeutic effects for patients with non-serious COVID-19. These findings need to be further confirmed by well-designed clinical trials with adequate sample sizes.     

Clinical efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine versus placebo for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectiveRandomized clinical trials and published meta-analyses assessing the clinical effectiveness of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) on the treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) yielded inconsistent results in terms of disease outcomes, in which the design of placebo-controlled studies can contribute to the heterogeneity. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CHM compared to placebo on the treatment of stable COPD, to provide robust evidence for the use of CHM in COPD.MethodsNine electronic databases were searched from inception to October 1, 2019 to identify placebo controlled randomized trials of CHM for the treatment of stable COPD and studies in English or Chinese were included. The primary outcomes were symptom score (CAT score), quality of life (SGRQ) and frequency of acute exacerbations. The secondary outcomes included lung function, clinical total effective rate and adverse events. The selection of studies, data extraction and coding and assessment of risk of bias of the included studies were conducted by two reviewers independently. Mean difference (MD) was used to analyze continuous variable and relative risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data.ResultsA total of eleven studies involving 1223 patients were included. While maintaining routine western pharmacotherapies (WP), CHM had significant advantage over the treatment of placebo in improving CAT score (MD -3.93; 95 %CI -6.01 to -1.85) and SGRQ score (MD -6.20; 95 %CI -10.13 to -2.28), reducing the frequency of acute exacerbations (MD -0.78; 95 %CI -1.40 to -0.16) and improving clinical effective rate (RR 1.29; 95 %CI 1.14 to 1.45), but had no significant effect on improving FEV₁%pred (MD 8.18; 95 %CI -4.22 to 20.58). High heterogeneity was found for the changes in exacerbation frequency and FEV₁%pred. No serious adverse events related to CHM were reported.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis of placebo-controlled RCTs demonstrated that the use of CHM in addition to WP could alleviate clinical symptoms, improve quality of life and clinical efficiency and reduce the frequency of exacerbations, which could be an alternative approach for treatment adjustment of COPD. CHM was a relatively safe treatment. These findings need to be verified in future with high-quality clinical trials.     

Chinese herbal medicine Dengzhan Xixin injection for acute ischemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Chinese herbal medicine Dengzhan Xixin (Erigeron breviscapus) injection for acute ischemic stroke.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis (CRD42016038413, http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO).MethodsSix electronic databases were searched from inception to March 2016 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of Dengzhan Xixin (DZXX) injection for acute ischemic stroke. The methodological quality of RCTs was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool.Data synthesiswas performed using RevMan 5.3 and was presented with mean difference (MD) or relative risk (RR) and their 95% confidence interval (CI). A summary of finding table was generated by GRADEpro (version 3.6).ResultsTwenty-five RCTs with 2498 participants were included and all trials adopted conventional therapy (CT) in both arms. Most of the studies had high risk of bias. The addition of DZXX to CT showed no significant benefit on death (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.05–1.63) within the treatment period (14–35 d), but showed higher Barthel index score (MD 10.20, 95% CI 8.16–12.25), lower neurological function deficit score (MD −3.99, 95% CI −5.68 to −2.30, by NFDS; MD −1.67, 95% CI −2.59 to −0.76, by NIHSS), and lower treatment failure (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.31–0.52). Thirteen trials (52%) reported the outcome of adverse events, but no serious adverse events were reported.ConclusionLow quality evidence implied that DZXX injection appeared to improve neurological function in patients with acute ischemic stroke. However, this potential benefit should be further studied in large, rigorous trials.     

Chinese medicine formulas for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUNDNonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) affects more than one-quarter of the global population. Due to the lack of approved chemical agents, many patients seek treatment from traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) formulas. A variety of systematic reviews have been published regarding the effectiveness and safety of TCM formulas for NAFLD.AIMTo critically appraise available systematic reviews and sort out the high-quality evidence on TCM formulas for the management of NAFLD.METHODSSeven databases were systematically searched from their inception to 28 February 2020. The search terms included “non-alcoholic fatty liver disease,” “Chinese medicines,” “systematic review,” and their synonyms. Systematic reviews involving TCM formulas alone or in combination with conventional medications were included. The methodological quality and risk of bias of eligible systematic reviews were evaluated by using A Measure Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) and Risk of Bias in Systematic Review (ROBIS). The quality of outcomes was assessed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.RESULTSSeven systematic reviews were ultimately included. All systematic reviews were conducted based on randomized controlled trials and published in the last decade. According to the AMSTAR 2 tool, one systematic review was judged as having a moderate confidence level, whereas the other studies were rated as having a low or extremely low level of confidence. The ROBIS tool showed that the included systematic reviews all had a high risk of bias due to insufficient consideration of identified concerns. According to the GRADE system, only two outcomes were determined as high quality; namely, TCM formulas with the HuoXueHuaYu principle were better than conventional medications in ultrasound improvement, and TCM formulas were superior to antioxidants in alanine aminotransferase normalization. Other outcomes were downgraded to lower levels, mainly because of heterogeneity among studies, not meeting optimal information sample size, and inclusion of excessive numbers of small sample studies. Nevertheless, the evidence quality of extracted outcomes should be further downgraded when applying to clinical practice due to indirectness.CONCLUSIONThe quality of available systematic reviews was not satisfactory. Researchers should avoid repeatedly conducting systematic reviews in this area and focus on designing rigorous randomized controlled trials to support TCM formula applications.