针刺临床试验的盲性现状与特点:系统综述与荟萃分析。

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Tinglan Liu, Lijiao Jiang, Shuangjing Li, Shuyang Cheng, Rong Zhuang, Zhiyi Xiong, Chongyang Sun, Baoyan Liu, Haoran Zhang, Shiyan Yan
{"title":"针刺临床试验的盲性现状与特点:系统综述与荟萃分析。","authors":"Tinglan Liu, Lijiao Jiang, Shuangjing Li, Shuyang Cheng, Rong Zhuang, Zhiyi Xiong, Chongyang Sun, Baoyan Liu, Haoran Zhang, Shiyan Yan","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02692-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sham acupuncture is a widely accepted control in acupuncture clinical trials. Given the nature of acupuncture, it is warranted to assess the blinding of sham-controlled trials. Despite the sham acupuncture design having been widely used, the overall blinding of sham acupuncture and the characteristics of blinding assessment in acupuncture trials are unclear. This research aims to assess the blinding status of acupuncture clinical trials and explore the blinding assessment characteristics in acupuncture trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This meta-analysis included all the acupuncture clinical trials published in English that performed blinding assessments and reported the results. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to April 2024. The primary outcome is Bang's Blinding Index (Bang's BI) and 95% credibility interval (CrI) was pooled using a Bayesian hierarchical model. The study adheres to the PRISMA guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-four eligible studies published from 1999 to 2024 were included. The mean of Bang's BI was - 0.24 (95% CrI - 0.34 to - 0.14, tau<sup>2</sup> = 0.13) for the sham acupuncture group and 0.41 (95% CrI 0.32 to 0.49, tau<sup>2</sup> = 0.10) for the verum acupuncture group. The characteristics of blinding showed that 62.50% of the trials had a Bang's BI greater than 0 in the verum group and less than 0 in the sham group; in 28.15% of the trials, the Bang's BI was greater than 0 in the verum group and greater than 0 in the sham group. Subgroup analysis revealed that area, number of research centers, treatment sessions, acupoints number, and evaluation timepoint can influence blinding results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall blinding status in current acupuncture clinical trials shows a majority correctly guessing for the verum group and opposite guessing for the sham group. However, in some acupuncture trials, the blinding of sham acupuncture might be compromised. Factors such as the Asian population, penetrating sham needling, and querying participants about their group assignment during the study increase the risk of unblinding and warrant careful consideration in sham acupuncture control design. Furthermore, researchers should closely monitor the blinding status of sham acupuncture and transparently report details of blinding assessments.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023403595.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"13 1","pages":"302"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11624600/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The blinding status and characteristics in acupuncture clinical trials: a systematic reviews and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Tinglan Liu, Lijiao Jiang, Shuangjing Li, Shuyang Cheng, Rong Zhuang, Zhiyi Xiong, Chongyang Sun, Baoyan Liu, Haoran Zhang, Shiyan Yan\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13643-024-02692-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sham acupuncture is a widely accepted control in acupuncture clinical trials. Given the nature of acupuncture, it is warranted to assess the blinding of sham-controlled trials. Despite the sham acupuncture design having been widely used, the overall blinding of sham acupuncture and the characteristics of blinding assessment in acupuncture trials are unclear. This research aims to assess the blinding status of acupuncture clinical trials and explore the blinding assessment characteristics in acupuncture trials.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This meta-analysis included all the acupuncture clinical trials published in English that performed blinding assessments and reported the results. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to April 2024. The primary outcome is Bang's Blinding Index (Bang's BI) and 95% credibility interval (CrI) was pooled using a Bayesian hierarchical model. The study adheres to the PRISMA guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-four eligible studies published from 1999 to 2024 were included. The mean of Bang's BI was - 0.24 (95% CrI - 0.34 to - 0.14, tau<sup>2</sup> = 0.13) for the sham acupuncture group and 0.41 (95% CrI 0.32 to 0.49, tau<sup>2</sup> = 0.10) for the verum acupuncture group. The characteristics of blinding showed that 62.50% of the trials had a Bang's BI greater than 0 in the verum group and less than 0 in the sham group; in 28.15% of the trials, the Bang's BI was greater than 0 in the verum group and greater than 0 in the sham group. Subgroup analysis revealed that area, number of research centers, treatment sessions, acupoints number, and evaluation timepoint can influence blinding results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall blinding status in current acupuncture clinical trials shows a majority correctly guessing for the verum group and opposite guessing for the sham group. However, in some acupuncture trials, the blinding of sham acupuncture might be compromised. Factors such as the Asian population, penetrating sham needling, and querying participants about their group assignment during the study increase the risk of unblinding and warrant careful consideration in sham acupuncture control design. Furthermore, researchers should closely monitor the blinding status of sham acupuncture and transparently report details of blinding assessments.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023403595.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"302\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11624600/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02692-0\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02692-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:假针灸是针灸临床试验中被广泛接受的对照。鉴于针灸的性质,有必要评估假对照试验的盲性。尽管假针灸设计已被广泛应用,但假针灸的整体盲化及针刺试验的盲化评价特点尚不清楚。本研究旨在评价针刺临床试验的盲性现状,探讨针刺临床试验的盲性评价特点。方法:本荟萃分析纳入了所有进行盲法评估并报告结果的英文针灸临床试验。我们检索了PubMed, Embase和Web of Science从成立到2024年4月的随机对照试验(rct)。主要结果是Bang’s Blinding Index (Bang’s BI), 95%可信区间(CrI)使用贝叶斯层次模型进行汇总。该研究遵循PRISMA指南。结果:纳入1999年至2024年发表的64项符合条件的研究。假针组Bang’s BI均值为- 0.24 (95% CrI为- 0.34 ~ - 0.14,tau2 = 0.13),脊骨针组Bang’s BI均值为0.41 (95% CrI为0.32 ~ 0.49,tau2 = 0.10)。盲性特征显示,62.50%的试验中,假体组Bang’s BI大于0,假体组小于0;在28.15%的试验中,verum组Bang’s BI大于0,sham组大于0。亚组分析显示,区域、研究中心数量、治疗疗程、穴位数量和评估时间点可以影响盲法结果。结论:目前针灸临床试验的总体盲态表现为verum组猜对多数,sham组猜对相反。然而,在一些针灸试验中,假针灸的盲性可能会受到损害。在研究过程中,亚洲人口、穿透假针刺和询问参与者的小组分配等因素增加了解盲的风险,需要在假针刺控制设计中仔细考虑。此外,研究人员应密切监测假针灸的盲化状态,并透明地报告盲化评估的细节。系统评价注册:PROSPERO CRD42023403595。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The blinding status and characteristics in acupuncture clinical trials: a systematic reviews and meta-analysis.

Background: Sham acupuncture is a widely accepted control in acupuncture clinical trials. Given the nature of acupuncture, it is warranted to assess the blinding of sham-controlled trials. Despite the sham acupuncture design having been widely used, the overall blinding of sham acupuncture and the characteristics of blinding assessment in acupuncture trials are unclear. This research aims to assess the blinding status of acupuncture clinical trials and explore the blinding assessment characteristics in acupuncture trials.

Methods: This meta-analysis included all the acupuncture clinical trials published in English that performed blinding assessments and reported the results. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to April 2024. The primary outcome is Bang's Blinding Index (Bang's BI) and 95% credibility interval (CrI) was pooled using a Bayesian hierarchical model. The study adheres to the PRISMA guidelines.

Results: Sixty-four eligible studies published from 1999 to 2024 were included. The mean of Bang's BI was - 0.24 (95% CrI - 0.34 to - 0.14, tau2 = 0.13) for the sham acupuncture group and 0.41 (95% CrI 0.32 to 0.49, tau2 = 0.10) for the verum acupuncture group. The characteristics of blinding showed that 62.50% of the trials had a Bang's BI greater than 0 in the verum group and less than 0 in the sham group; in 28.15% of the trials, the Bang's BI was greater than 0 in the verum group and greater than 0 in the sham group. Subgroup analysis revealed that area, number of research centers, treatment sessions, acupoints number, and evaluation timepoint can influence blinding results.

Conclusion: Overall blinding status in current acupuncture clinical trials shows a majority correctly guessing for the verum group and opposite guessing for the sham group. However, in some acupuncture trials, the blinding of sham acupuncture might be compromised. Factors such as the Asian population, penetrating sham needling, and querying participants about their group assignment during the study increase the risk of unblinding and warrant careful consideration in sham acupuncture control design. Furthermore, researchers should closely monitor the blinding status of sham acupuncture and transparently report details of blinding assessments.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023403595.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
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