Comprehensive consideration of multiple determinants from evidence to recommendations in guidelines for most traditional Chinese medicine was suboptimal: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The overall comprehensive consideration of the factors influencing the recommendations in the traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) guidelines remains poorly studied. This study systematically evaluate the factors influencing recommendations formation in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and TCM CPGs. METHODS: This was a methodological review in which we searched six databases and multiple related websites. The GRADE CPGs were identified as the guidelines developed by the GRADE Working Group or the two Co-Chairs. For the TCM CPGs, we randomly selected guidelines that were published by the TCM or integrative medicine academic societies from China mainland (published by the TCM or integrative medicine academic societies of China mainland). Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data. We included CPGs published in 2018-2022. We extracted information on the influencing factors of evidence to recommendation and conducted the analyses using descriptive statistics and calculated the proportion of relevant items by IBM SPSS Statistics and Microsoft Excel to compare the differences between the GRADE CPGs and the TCM CPGs. RESULTS: Forty-five GRADE CPGs (including 912 recommendations) and 88 TCM CPGs (including 2452 recommendations) were included. TCM recommendations mainly considered the four key determinants of desirable anticipated effects, undesirable anticipated effects, balance between desirable and undesirable effects, certainty of evidence, with less than 20% of other dimensions. And TCM CPGs presented more strong recommendations (for or against) and inappropriate discordant recommendations than GRADE CPGs. GRADE CPGs were more comprehensive considered about the factors affecting the recommendations, and considered more than 70% of all factors in the evidence to recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: The TCM CPGs lack a comprehensive consideration of multiple influencing determinants from evidence to recommendations. In the future, the correct application of the GRADE approaches should be emphasized.

Quality Evaluation and Reporting Specification for Real-World Studies of Traditional Chinese Medicine.

In recent years, the real-world studies (RWS) have attracted extensive attention, and the real-world evidence (RWE) has been accepted to support the drug development in China and abroad. However, there is still a lack of standards for the evaluation of the quality of RWE. It is necessary to formulate a quality evaluation and reporting specification for RWE especially in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). To this end, under the guidance of China Association of Chinese Medicine, the Quality Evaluation and Reporting Specification for Real-World Evidence of Traditional Chinese Medicine (QUERST) Group, including 24 experts (clinical epidemiologists, clinicians, pharmacologists, ethical reviewer and statisticians), was established to develop the specification. This specification contains the listing of classification of RWS design and RWE, the general principles and methods of RWE quality evaluation (26 tools or scales), 25 types of bias in RWS, the special considerations in evaluating the quality of RWE of TCM, and the 19 reporting standards of RWE. This specification aims to propose the quality evaluation principles and key points of RWE, and provide guidance for the proper use of RWE in the development of TCM new drugs.

The effect of berberine on insulin resistance in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: detailed statistical analysis plan (SAP) for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has been widely used in clinical settings, a major challenge that remains in TCM is to evaluate its efficacy scientifically. This randomized controlled trial aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of berberine in the treatment of patients with polycystic ovary syndrome. In order to improve the transparency and research quality of this clinical trial, we prepared this statistical analysis plan (SAP). METHODS: The trial design, primary and secondary outcomes, and safety outcomes were declared to reduce selection biases in data analysis and result reporting. We specified detailed methods for data management and statistical analyses. Statistics in corresponding tables, listings, and graphs were outlined. DISCUSSION: The SAP provided more detailed information than trial protocol on data management and statistical analysis methods. Any post hoc analyses could be identified via referring to this SAP, and the possible selection bias and performance bias will be reduced in the trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01138930 , registered on 7 June 2010.

Integrative treatment for low back pain: An exploratory systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Low back pain (LBP) is a common musculoskeletal condition often treated using integrative medicine (IM). Most reviews have focused on a single complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapy for LBP rather than evaluating wider integrative approaches. This exploratory systematic review aimed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and provide evidence on the effectiveness, cost effectiveness and adverse effects of integrative treatment for LBP. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in 12 English and Chinese databases. RCTs evaluating an integrative treatment for musculoskeletal related LBP were included. Reporting, methodological quality and relevant clinical characteristics were assessed and appraised. Metaanalyses were performed for outcomes where trials were sufficiently homogenous. RESULTS: Fifty-six RCTs were identified evaluating integrative treatment for LBP. Although reporting and methodological qualities were poor, meta-analysis showed a favourable effect for integrative treatment over conventional and CAM treatment for back pain and function at 3 months or less follow-up. Two trials investigated costs, reporting £ 5332 per quality adjusted life years with 6 Alexander technique lessons plus exercise at 12 months follow-up; and an increased total costs of $244 when giving an additional up to 15 sessions of CAM package of care at 12 weeks. Sixteen trials mentioned safety; no severe adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSION: Integrative treatment that combines CAM with conventional therapies appeared to have beneficial effects on pain and function. However, evidence is limited due to heterogeneity, the relatively small numbers available for subgroup analyses and the low methodological quality of the included trials. Identification of studies of true IM was not possible due to lack of reporting of the intervention details (registration No. CRD42013003916).