ABSTRACT
The grading of evidence is an important factor in clinical decision-making. The current evidence grading system based on western medicine is limited in the clinical practice of traditional Chinese medicine （TCM）， therefore we propose the solutions to the development of grading system for TCM interventional evidence， following the international evidence grading standards， taking into considerations of the unique characteristics of TCM practice， based on the Grades of recommendation， assessment， development and evaluation （GARDE） evaluation system， and integrating with grading system regarding TCM classical literature and empirical evidence from modern famous doctors. The evidence from classical literature is suggested to be evaluated from three aspects including source of ancient medical records， comprehensive of treatment details， and the inheritance. The qualification of famous doctors， content integrity， and inheritance of experiences will be used to evaluate the evidence from famous doctors' experience. The multi-sourced evidence such as TCM classical literature， experience of modern famous doctors， and modern researches is mainly integrated in a qualitative way， and the overall level of evidence of TCM interventions will be graded consistently with the GRADE system based on modern research. The evidence from classical literature and modern famous doctors' experience will be assessed and considered as supplementary evidence， which will make the evaluation of clinical evidence more objectively and comprehensively， thereby guiding clinical practice further.
ABSTRACT
The similarities and differences between Chinese medicine (CM) education in China and Australia are considered in a detailed comparison of the five-year undergraduate programmes offered by the Beijing University of CM (BUCM), China and RMIT University (RMIT), Australia. BUCM is a specialist CM institution whereas RMIT is a technological university providing training in a wide range of professional areas. Both institutions are considered to be leading tertiary institutions within their respective countries. A brief account of the historical development of CM education in China and Australia is provided. We have compared the curricula and structure of the programmes and how they each address the development of essential graduate capabilities for competent and safe clinical CM practice. We have also considered the quality assurance processes and the requirements of external regulatory authorities. The curricula and educational objectives of the 2 programmes are broadly similar. Both institutions have established rigorous processes for managing teaching quality and ensuring appropriate graduates to promote evidence-based CM practice. However, there are differences relating to the healthcare systems of China and Australia and to the availability of teaching resources and clinical training facilities such as classical CM texts and CM hospitals. These differences present major challenges for the internationalisation of CM education. The findings of this study may facilitate the process of CM curriculum development in a global context.