Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine最新文献

{"title":"Strong Recommendations Supported Only by Low-Certainty Evidence, Pharmaceutical Company Payments, and Accuracy of Conflict-of-Interest Disclosure in Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Seven Major Cancers.","authors":"Hayase Hakariya, Akemi Hara, Janne Estill, Yangqin Xun, Long Ge, Yaolong Chen, Hiroaki Saito, Tetsuya Tanimoto, Hiroaki Shimmura, Akihiko Ozaki","doi":"10.1111/jebm.70201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jebm.70201","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"e70201"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7,"publicationDate":"2026-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149069684","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Performance of Large Language Models in Automated Medical Literature Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"Chenggong Xie,&nbsp;Weichang Kong,&nbsp;Liuting Pi,&nbsp;Diaoxin Qi,&nbsp;Yuxuan Yang,&nbsp;Bin Wang,&nbsp;Hao Liang","doi":"10.1111/jebm.70166","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jebm.70166","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objective</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To systematically evaluate the diagnostic performance of large language models (LLMs) in automated medical literature screening and to determine their potential role in supporting evidence synthesis workflows.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and CBM were searched from January 1, 2022 to June 11, 2026. Studies assessing LLMs for automated title and abstract screening or full-text eligibility assessment in medical literature were included. The primary outcomes were sensitivity and specificity. Secondary outcomes included positive and negative likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratio, area under the curve (AUC), and efficiency-related metrics. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were estimated using a bivariate random-effects model and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic framework. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were performed to explore sources of heterogeneity. This systematic review was registered with the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/56d8j).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Eighteen studies published between 2023 and 2025 were included. In title and abstract screening, the pooled sensitivity was 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81–0.96) and pooled specificity was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90–0.97). The summary receiver operating characteristic AUC reached 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96–0.99). In full-text screening, pooled sensitivity and specificity both reached 0.99 (95% CI: 0.95–1.00) and the AUC was 0.99 (95% CI: 0.98–1.00). Prompt strategies incorporating examples or chain-of-thought reasoning were associated with higher sensitivity than strategies without these approaches (0.95 vs. 0.86, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). Several studies reported substantial efficiency gains, including workload reductions ranging from approximately 50% to 99% and screening time reductions of up to tenfold.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>LLMs shows promising performance in automated medical literature screening, particularly in full-text assessment. These models show strong potential as high sensitivity assistive tools that can substantially reduce manual screening burden while supporting evidence synthesis. Further real-world validation is needed to establish their role in evidence-based medicine.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7,"publicationDate":"2026-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148584272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Challenges in Treatment Node Classification for Network Meta-Analysis of Non-Pharmacological Interventions: Insights From a Researcher Survey","authors":"Kansak Boonpattharatthiti,&nbsp;Deborah M. Caldwell,&nbsp;Nathorn Chaiyakunapruk,&nbsp;Teerapon Dhippayom","doi":"10.1111/jebm.70171","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jebm.70171","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objective</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) are diverse and complex, making treatment node classification in network meta-analyses (NMAs) particularly challenging. Accurate node classification is essential, as it directly affects the validity and applicability of NMA findings. The aim of this study was to explore current practices in treatment node classification in NMAs of NPIs and identify key challenges.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>An online survey was conducted among the first and corresponding authors of NMAs of NPIs published in first-quartile journals over the past five years. Eligible authors were identified through a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL on February 4, 2025. A self-administered questionnaire assessed experiences, perceptions, and recommendations regarding node classification. Quantitative data were summarized descriptively, and qualitative responses were analyzed thematically.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Of 471 eligible authors contacted, 32 responded (response rate: 6.8%). Most (43.8%) had 5–10 years of experience in evidence synthesis, and 81.3% had published 1–5 NMAs of NPIs. Nearly all reported difficulties in node classification due to within-intervention and comparator variation, incorporating delivery features, balancing lumping versus splitting, and meeting the transitivity assumption. Respondents classified nodes by following prespecified protocols, relying on the characteristics of included studies, or using mixed approaches. While views on standard guidance were mixed, several respondents supported the development of simplified guidance for major research areas to support consistent node classification.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Researchers encounter considerable difficulties in classifying treatment nodes in NMAs of NPIs. Findings highlight the need for prespecified and structured frameworks for certain types of NPIs to improve reproducibility, and reliability in future NMAs.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7,"publicationDate":"2026-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jebm.70171","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148630203","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Development of the Tool for Rating the qUality of Services sTandards (TRUST)","authors":"Zhenggang Bai,&nbsp;Yumeng Zhu,&nbsp;Xingsu Gao,&nbsp;Nannan Shi,&nbsp;Xiaoliang Cheng,&nbsp;Ruhai Bai,&nbsp;Jingchun Fan,&nbsp;Janne Estill,&nbsp;Weijie Xing,&nbsp;Feng Tong,&nbsp;Dwi Linna Suswardany,&nbsp;Paul Montgomery-Marks,&nbsp;Liang Du,&nbsp;Iris Chi,&nbsp;Haibo Cheng,&nbsp;the TRUST Working Group","doi":"10.1111/jebm.70173","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jebm.70173","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study aimed to develop a preliminary framework for the systematic, multi-dimensional evaluation of service standards, the Tool for Rating the qUality of Service sTandards (TRUST), to address the heterogeneity and quality-related deficiencies in existing standards and to provide a preliminary evidence-informed basis for evaluating, optimizing, and promoting the quality of service standards.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>TRUST was developed through an evidence based multi-step process. First, a TRUST Working Group, consisting of a drafting team, an expert panel, and a steering committee, was established. A pool of candidate items was then constructed through a systematic literature review that identified 16 existing standard evaluation frameworks, followed by a group discussion. Subsequently, a structured online expert survey was conducted to assess expert agreement on the preliminary set of items. Item weights were calculated using the Precedence Chart method. Finally, we conducted a pilot study and calculated the inter-rater reliability coefficients applying TRUST to a sample of 51 published standards.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>TRUST comprises 17 items across five distinct dimensions: collaboration (28.0%), scope and purpose (7.6%), quality management (39.1%), implementation and updates (15.6%) and social impact (9.7%). Inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] (A,1)) across items ranged from 0.502 to 0.860, and the total score showed excellent reliability (ICC (A,1) = 0.832, 95% CI: 0.723–0.901).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>TRUST offers an initial evidence-based architecture to guide the future development of assessment instruments for standards, laying the groundwork for theoretical and practical support in optimizing and refining standards.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7,"publicationDate":"2026-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jebm.70173","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148630258","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis","authors":"Yue Zhang,&nbsp;Jinyang Meng,&nbsp;Xiaobo Liu,&nbsp;Hong Tang,&nbsp;Dongling Zhong,&nbsp;Yuxi Li,&nbsp;Jialin Li,&nbsp;Juan Li,&nbsp;Yongxin Cui,&nbsp;Anren Zhang,&nbsp;Chen Xue,&nbsp;Rongjiang Jin","doi":"10.1111/jebm.70155","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jebm.70155","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Objective&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;This systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare and rank the efficacy and acceptability of different repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) modalities for major depressive disorder (MDD).&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Methods&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;The following databases were searched from inception to October 8, 2025: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM), Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), and Wanfang Database. In order to identify relevant unpublished studies and ongoing clinical trials, gray literature and trial registries were examined. The randomized controlled trials that investigated the effect of rTMS interventions for MDD were included. We included studies involving adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with a clinical diagnosis of unipolar MDD, which utilized at least two of the following rTMS modalities: low-frequency left (LFL-) rTMS, high-frequency left (HFL-) rTMS, low-frequency right (LFR-) rTMS, high-frequency right (HFR-) rTMS, bilateral (BL-) rTMS, deep TMS (dTMS), theta burst stimulation (TBS), accelerated rTMS (aTMS), synchronized TMS (sTMS), or sham stimulation. The primary endpoints were efficacy (response rate) and acceptability (dropout rate). Additionally, the symptom remission rate was assessed as a secondary outcome. Two authors independently completed the article selection and data extraction. We also evaluated the risk of bias in the included studies with the Cochrane ROB 2.0 tool. The certainty of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework. A conventional pairwise meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software. A NMA was performed with Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations to facilitate indirect comparisons across different rTMS modalities. We applied funnel plots to examine publication bias and assessed the robustness of our findings through sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis.&lt;/p&gt;\u0000 &lt;/section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;section&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;h3&gt; Results&lt;/h3&gt;\u0000 \u0000 &lt;p&gt;A total of 141 trials comprising 10,587 participants with MDD were included. The aTMS (odds ratio [OR]: 4.14; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.14, 8.01), TBS (OR: 4.47; 95% CI, 3.13, 6.37), BL (OR: 3.93; 95% CI, 2.56, 6.03), HFL (OR: 3.34; 95% CI, 2.80, 3.98), LFR (OR: 2.90; 95% CI, 2.13, 3.95) demonstrated significantly greater efficacy than sham control. Additionally, aTMS (OR: 4.44; 95% CI, 1.02, 19.29), TBS (OR: 4.78; 95% CI, 1.23, 18.62), BL (OR: 4.21; 95% CI, 1.06, 16.71) also showed superior efficacy compared to LFL. Furthermore, sTMS was less effective than TBS (OR: 0.27; 95% CI, 0.08, 0.94). In terms of achieving re","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7,"publicationDate":"2026-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148361071","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Prognostic Value of the TyG Index and CHG Index in Gastric Cancer","authors":"Yazhi Mo,&nbsp;Si Chen,&nbsp;Yuemei Chen,&nbsp;Chunying Zhang,&nbsp;Shanying Deng,&nbsp;Zhigang Mao,&nbsp;Tonghao Zhang,&nbsp;Tingting Zeng,&nbsp;Yali Song","doi":"10.1111/jebm.70142","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jebm.70142","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objective</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To assess associations of the triglyceride-glucose (TyG) index and cholesterol high-density lipoprotein glucose (CHG) index with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in gastric cancer (GC), and to explore whether prognostic value differs by pathological stage.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We conducted a retrospective cohort study using routinely collected electronic medical record data from West China Hospital, Sichuan University, including patients who underwent GC resection between 2008 and 2021. TyG and CHG were calculated from preoperative laboratory parameters. Associations with OS and PFS were assessed using multivariable Cox models, with subgroup analyses by pathological stage. Kaplan–Meier and time-dependent receiver operating characteristic analyses were also performed.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In the overall cohort, TyG and CHG have no independent association with OS or PFS after adjustment. Subgroup analyses stratified by cancer stage showed higher CHG index was associated with worse OS in Stage 1 (hazard ratios [HR] = 2.038, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.336–3.110, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), whereas higher TyG index was associated with better OS in Stage 4 (HR = 0.860, 95% CI: 0.756–0.980, <i>p</i> = 0.023). Kaplan–Meier analyses supported these stage-specific associations. CHG showed the best predictive performance for Stage 1 OS, while TyG index showed relatively stable discrimination for Stage 4 OS.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The prognostic value of TyG and CHG in GC appears to be stage-dependent. CHG index may be more useful in stage 1, whereas lower TyG index may indicate poorer prognosis in stage 4.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7,"publicationDate":"2026-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148361099","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Development of the Core Outcome Set for Herbal Medicine Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation (COS-HM-LDH) in Korean Medicine Practice","authors":"Soo-Dam Kim,&nbsp;Changsop Yang,&nbsp;Kyung-Min Shin,&nbsp;Mi Mi Ko,&nbsp;Sungha Kim,&nbsp;Myeong Soo Lee","doi":"10.1111/jebm.70169","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jebm.70169","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a common cause of low back pain and disability. Herbal medicine (HM) is increasingly used for LDH in Korean medicine (KM) practice, but evidence synthesis is limited by inconsistent outcome selection and reporting. We aimed to develop a core outcome set (COS) to standardize reporting in HM studies of LDH in KM practice.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The study followed the Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development (COS-STAD), with reporting guided by the Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Reporting (COS-STAR). Candidate outcomes were identified through a systematic review of Korean (OASIS, ScienceON) and international (PubMed, CENTRAL) databases from inception to December 2024, supplemented by clinical practice guidelines and textbooks. Outcomes were refined into predefined domains and potential effect modifiers (EMs) were identified. A two-round Delphi survey with experts was conducted, followed by a Delphi survey with KM clinicians to assess feasibility in practice. A structured consensus meeting was held to finalize the COS.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Of 1426 records, 122 studies were included. Ninety-six outcomes were refined to 75 distinct outcomes across six domains, alongside 15 EMs. Delphi participation included 25 experts in Round 1, 23 experts in Round 2, and 10 KM clinicians in the clinician Delphi survey. The final Core Outcome Set for Herbal Medicine Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation (COS-HM-LDH) comprised 13 outcomes and 10 EMs.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>COS-HM-LDH provides a standardized minimum set of clinically important LDH outcomes and EMs for HM trials and real-world studies in KM practice, improving consistency and comparability across studies.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7,"publicationDate":"2026-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148447587","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comparison of the Efficacy of Different Treatment Regimens for Resistant Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis","authors":"Yao Xiao,&nbsp;Kun Feng,&nbsp;Xiaoping Chen,&nbsp;Yong Peng,&nbsp;Kai Liu","doi":"10.1111/jebm.70154","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jebm.70154","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Our study tends to perform a network meta-analysis to compare the effect of different treatments on resistant hypertension (RH).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A systematic search was conducted in databases up to April 1, 2026. We conducted a network meta-analysis using random effects to compare the change of systolic/diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) between the following interventions: second-generation renal denervation (RDN), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), endothelin receptor antagonist, aldosterone synthase inhibitor (ASI), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, baroreflex activation therapy, central arteriovenous anastomosis, lifestyle, and control group.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Thirty-three eligible studies were included in the final analysis. After conducting sensitivity analyses, MRA significantly lowered both office and 24-h blood pressure (BP) compared to control group (mean difference –9.11, [95% confidence interval –10.44 to –7.79] for office SBP; –4.97 [–5.83 to –4.11] for office DBP; –9.64 [–11.73 to –7.54] for 24-h SBP; –3.75 [–5.08 to –2.42] for 24-h DBP). RDN effectively reduced both office and 24-h BP, and it caused a large reduction in office DBP compared to control group (–6.63 [–8.58 to –4.68] for office DBP; –3.36 [–4.57 to –2.14] for 24-h DBP). Lifestyle and ASI effectively reduced office and 24-h BP, and it as well as MRA were almost in the top three treatments.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>MRA can be the priority treatment for RH. ASI and RDN are also optimal alternatives to MRA, particularly suitable for 24-h BP and uncontrolled DBP management, respectively. A combination of lifestyle alongside pharmacological/device-based therapies may represent the optimal approach. More trials concerning other treatments for RH are needed.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7,"publicationDate":"2026-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148375943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"AI-Assisted Literature Mining Reveals Spatiotemporal Heterogeneity and Progression Trajectories of Traditional Chinese Medicine Syndromes in Coronary Heart Disease in China","authors":"Qianzi Che,&nbsp;Tian Song,&nbsp;Zhaoyuan Gong,&nbsp;Chuxuan Wang,&nbsp;Bin Liu,&nbsp;Mingzhi Hu,&nbsp;Ning Liang,&nbsp;Haili Zhang,&nbsp;Huizhen Li,&nbsp;Qingyang Zeng,&nbsp;Lin Chen,&nbsp;Yuanming Leng,&nbsp;Xihao Cao,&nbsp;Jing Wan,&nbsp;Jing Guo,&nbsp;Nannan Shi","doi":"10.1111/jebm.70162","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jebm.70162","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Despite the centrality of syndrome differentiation in guiding personalized traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) interventions for coronary heart disease (CHD), existing studies of TCM syndrome distribution are constrained by fragmented methodologies and limited spatiotemporal resolution. In this study, we employed an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted literature mining framework combined with statistical and pattern-mining analyses to characterize the spatiotemporal patterns and evolutionary dynamics of CHD syndrome elements across China. We mined data from 651 peer-reviewed publications reporting 234,656 CHD patients, published between January 2000 and December 2023. A customized constrained Sequential PAttern Discovery using Equivalence classes algorithm was applied to quantify syndrome transition trajectories, while hierarchical clustering integrated with similarity-matrix heatmaps was utilized to detect syndrome co-occurrence patterns. Analyses were stratified by four disease stages, six geographic regions and three periods (2000–2009, 2010–2019, post-2020). Meta-analysis and clustering results revealed that blood stasis, qi deficiency and phlegm emerged as conserved core syndrome elements across all stages, dynamically interacting with qi-yin dual deficiency and phlegm–turbidity as the disease progressed. Geospatial analysis identified a Northern China predominance of qi stagnation-blood stasis, whereas humid subtropical regions exhibited accelerated phlegm–stasis synergy. Temporal analysis uncovered a paradigm shift toward blood stasis–phlegm synergy, coinciding with modern dietary transitions and sedentary lifestyle trends. By leveraging AI-driven methodologies, this study reveals the spatiotemporal heterogeneity of CHD syndrome patterns and underscores the necessity for geographically personalized and temporally adaptive TCM therapeutic strategies for CHD management.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7,"publicationDate":"2026-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jebm.70162","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148404905","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Reliability and Usability Assessment of CARE-Acupuncture Reporting Guideline","authors":"Lin Shi,&nbsp;Jinjin Zhou,&nbsp;Kangwen Ming,&nbsp;Xing Wang,&nbsp;Zhirui Xu,&nbsp;Myeong Soo Lee,&nbsp;Enyi Liu,&nbsp;Lin Yu,&nbsp;Yuting Duan","doi":"10.1111/jebm.70168","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jebm.70168","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7,"publicationDate":"2026-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148447505","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}