Scholarlink

Background <p>Previous studies have evaluated traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) clinical randomized controlled trial (RCT) literature broadly, but they have provided limited depth in evaluating the specific aspects of trial quality.</p> Objective <p>This study aims to develop a specialized literature quality assessment system for TCM RCTs.</p> Methods <p>We integrated international standards with TCM characteristics to create a checklist for evaluating basic method information and intervention operations. A rating system was established to classify content into four categories based on completeness and accuracy.</p> Results <p>We assessed 2776 TCM RCTs across six disease categories. For basic method information, “outcome indicators” and “participants’ medical sources” were commonly mentioned but often vague, with accurate rates of 60.73% and 74.52%, respectively. Critical elements, including “TCM diagnosis and diagnostic basis,” “TCM syndromes (clinically defined patterns of symptoms that guide TCM therapy),” “randomization methods,” and “blinding” were frequently omitted, with omission rates ranging from 68.58% to 97.48%. For interventions, “treatment group intervention” had higher completeness (97.83%) than “control group intervention” (82.68%). Inaccurate reporting commonly stemmed from incomplete descriptions of interventions or unspecified drug compositions.</p> Conclusion <p>Our results suggested a serious concern that TCM–related concepts were often missing in trial designs for TCM RCTs, which might impede the development of TCM theories. Also, this study’s inaccurate trial designs and intervention descriptions can provide cautionary examples for future RCT protocols or reports in TCM to avoid.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Evaluation of randomized controlled trial literature in traditional Chinese medicine: a literature quality assessment system

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月21日

查看全文
  • Yunan Zhang,
  • Heyuan Liu,
  • Guangxiang Jiang,
  • Shujing Xu,
  • Yang Song,
  • Dongran Han,
  • Yixing Liu

摘要

Background

Previous studies have evaluated traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) clinical randomized controlled trial (RCT) literature broadly, but they have provided limited depth in evaluating the specific aspects of trial quality.

Objective

This study aims to develop a specialized literature quality assessment system for TCM RCTs.

Methods

We integrated international standards with TCM characteristics to create a checklist for evaluating basic method information and intervention operations. A rating system was established to classify content into four categories based on completeness and accuracy.

Results

We assessed 2776 TCM RCTs across six disease categories. For basic method information, “outcome indicators” and “participants’ medical sources” were commonly mentioned but often vague, with accurate rates of 60.73% and 74.52%, respectively. Critical elements, including “TCM diagnosis and diagnostic basis,” “TCM syndromes (clinically defined patterns of symptoms that guide TCM therapy),” “randomization methods,” and “blinding” were frequently omitted, with omission rates ranging from 68.58% to 97.48%. For interventions, “treatment group intervention” had higher completeness (97.83%) than “control group intervention” (82.68%). Inaccurate reporting commonly stemmed from incomplete descriptions of interventions or unspecified drug compositions.

Conclusion

Our results suggested a serious concern that TCM–related concepts were often missing in trial designs for TCM RCTs, which might impede the development of TCM theories. Also, this study’s inaccurate trial designs and intervention descriptions can provide cautionary examples for future RCT protocols or reports in TCM to avoid.