Using PRECIS-2 in Chinese herbal medicine randomized controlled trials for irritable bowel syndrome: A methodological exploration based on literature

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
{"title":"Using PRECIS-2 in Chinese herbal medicine randomized controlled trials for irritable bowel syndrome: A methodological exploration based on literature","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.imr.2024.101053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The pragmatism levels of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) mean how similar the interventions delivered in the trial setting match those in the setting where the results will be applied. We aimed to investigate the association between the consistency of pragmatism among the characteristics of RCT design and its effect size of results in Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Eight English and Chinese language databases were searched for RCTs on CHM for IBS. Six reviewers independently assessed the pragmatism of trials using the pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary 2 (PRECIS-2) tool. The consistency of pragmatism levels among the characteristics of RCT design was calculated using the coefficient of variation. Linear regression models were adopted to explore influence factors of the pragmatism of RCTs.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>78 RCTs were included. The level of consistency in the pragmatism for RCT's design was significantly correlated with the effect size of the results (binary outcome, r = -0.413; <em>P</em> = 0.005; continuous outcome, r = -0.779, <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). PRECIS-2 score was higher in trials with individualized interventions than fixed interventions (3.29 [0.32] vs 2.90 [0.32]; Cohen's <em>d</em> relative effect size, 0.52; P &lt; 0.001) and in standard or usual-treatment-controlled trials than placebo-controlled (3.05 [0.37] vs 2.83 [0.28]; Cohen's <em>d</em> relative effect size, 0.32; P = 0.048).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The consistency of pragmatism level across the 9 domains of the PRECIS-2 tool in CHM IBS RCTs was positively correlated with the effect size of the results.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":13644,"journal":{"name":"Integrative Medicine Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213422024000337/pdfft?md5=d4822e815f5ff4295ed3c32c35046d45&pid=1-s2.0-S2213422024000337-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrative Medicine Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213422024000337","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The pragmatism levels of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) mean how similar the interventions delivered in the trial setting match those in the setting where the results will be applied. We aimed to investigate the association between the consistency of pragmatism among the characteristics of RCT design and its effect size of results in Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

Methods

Eight English and Chinese language databases were searched for RCTs on CHM for IBS. Six reviewers independently assessed the pragmatism of trials using the pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary 2 (PRECIS-2) tool. The consistency of pragmatism levels among the characteristics of RCT design was calculated using the coefficient of variation. Linear regression models were adopted to explore influence factors of the pragmatism of RCTs.

Results

78 RCTs were included. The level of consistency in the pragmatism for RCT's design was significantly correlated with the effect size of the results (binary outcome, r = -0.413; P = 0.005; continuous outcome, r = -0.779, P < 0.001). PRECIS-2 score was higher in trials with individualized interventions than fixed interventions (3.29 [0.32] vs 2.90 [0.32]; Cohen's d relative effect size, 0.52; P < 0.001) and in standard or usual-treatment-controlled trials than placebo-controlled (3.05 [0.37] vs 2.83 [0.28]; Cohen's d relative effect size, 0.32; P = 0.048).

Conclusion

The consistency of pragmatism level across the 9 domains of the PRECIS-2 tool in CHM IBS RCTs was positively correlated with the effect size of the results.

在治疗肠易激综合征的中药随机对照试验中使用 PRECIS-2:基于文献的方法学探索
随机对照试验(RCT)的实用性水平是指在试验环境中实施的干预措施与结果应用环境中的干预措施的相似程度。我们的目的是调查 RCT 设计特点中的实用性一致性与中草药治疗肠易激综合征(IBS)结果的效应大小之间的关联。研究人员在 8 个中英文数据库中检索了有关中药治疗肠易激综合征的 RCT。六位审稿人使用实用性-解释性连续性指标摘要2(PRECIS-2)工具对试验的实用性进行了独立评估。使用变异系数计算了RCT设计特征之间实用性水平的一致性。采用线性回归模型探讨 RCT 实用性的影响因素。共纳入 78 项 RCT。RCT 设计的实用性一致性水平与结果的效应大小显著相关(二元结果,r = -0.413;= 0.005;连续结果,r = -0.779,< 0.001)。个性化干预试验的 PRECIS-2 评分高于固定干预试验(3.29 [0.32] vs 2.90 [0.32];科恩相对效应大小,0.52;P < 0.001),标准或常规治疗对照试验的 PRECIS-2 评分高于安慰剂对照试验(3.05 [0.37] vs 2.83 [0.28];科恩相对效应大小,0.32;P = 0.048)。在CHM IBS RCT中,PRECIS-2工具9个领域的实用性水平的一致性与结果的效应大小呈正相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Integrative Medicine Research
Integrative Medicine Research Medicine-Complementary and Alternative Medicine
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.90%
发文量
65
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Integrative Medicine Research (IMR) is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal focused on scientific research for integrative medicine including traditional medicine (emphasis on acupuncture and herbal medicine), complementary and alternative medicine, and systems medicine. The journal includes papers on basic research, clinical research, methodology, theory, computational analysis and modelling, topical reviews, medical history, education and policy based on physiology, pathology, diagnosis and the systems approach in the field of integrative medicine.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信