[Systematic review and quality evaluation of core outcome sets in traditional Chinese medicine(2019-2024)].

Q3 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
Hui-Zhong Zhu, Yu-Yun Li, Zi-Fan Sang, Bo Pang, Jun-Hua Zhang
{"title":"[Systematic review and quality evaluation of core outcome sets in traditional Chinese medicine(2019-2024)].","authors":"Hui-Zhong Zhu, Yu-Yun Li, Zi-Fan Sang, Bo Pang, Jun-Hua Zhang","doi":"10.19540/j.cnki.cjcmm.20260526.502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A core outcome set(COS) refers to the minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical studies within a specific field. With the development of the COS for traditional Chinese medicine(COS-TCM), there has been a rapid increase in related publications, highlighting the need for a periodic secondary review. This study systematically reviewed and evaluated the quality of published COS-TCM research by comprehensively searching Chinese and English literature databases as well as specialized databases, using qualitative analysis and quality assessment methods. The objective is to synthesize the current state of research, identify common issues and methodological weaknesses, thereby supporting the high-quality advancement of the COS-TCM field. A total of 39 COS-TCM studies were included. It was found that existing studies generally employ sound methodologies. However, methodological improvements are needed in areas such as patient involvement, the development and publication of study protocols, the generation of a preliminary list of outcomes, and managing attrition in Delphi surveys. While the structural presentation is largely complete, reporting remains insufficient regarding the roles played by different stakeholder groups, detailed content of the consensus process, and the presentation of core outcomes. To improve future development, researchers could focus on both methodological application and reporting quality, and also address aspects such as research topic selection, stakeholder engagement, and the development of TCM-specific outcome and measurement instruments to better reflect the therapeutic characteristics and comparative advantages of TCM.</p>","PeriodicalId":52437,"journal":{"name":"Zhongguo Zhongyao Zazhi","volume":"51 18","pages":"5408-5416"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zhongguo Zhongyao Zazhi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19540/j.cnki.cjcmm.20260526.502","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A core outcome set(COS) refers to the minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical studies within a specific field. With the development of the COS for traditional Chinese medicine(COS-TCM), there has been a rapid increase in related publications, highlighting the need for a periodic secondary review. This study systematically reviewed and evaluated the quality of published COS-TCM research by comprehensively searching Chinese and English literature databases as well as specialized databases, using qualitative analysis and quality assessment methods. The objective is to synthesize the current state of research, identify common issues and methodological weaknesses, thereby supporting the high-quality advancement of the COS-TCM field. A total of 39 COS-TCM studies were included. It was found that existing studies generally employ sound methodologies. However, methodological improvements are needed in areas such as patient involvement, the development and publication of study protocols, the generation of a preliminary list of outcomes, and managing attrition in Delphi surveys. While the structural presentation is largely complete, reporting remains insufficient regarding the roles played by different stakeholder groups, detailed content of the consensus process, and the presentation of core outcomes. To improve future development, researchers could focus on both methodological application and reporting quality, and also address aspects such as research topic selection, stakeholder engagement, and the development of TCM-specific outcome and measurement instruments to better reflect the therapeutic characteristics and comparative advantages of TCM.

[2019-2024年中医药核心结局集的系统评价与质量评价]。
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
Zhongguo Zhongyao Zazhi
Zhongguo Zhongyao Zazhi Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (all)
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
581
期刊介绍:
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书