Suppr超能文献

[针刺随机对照试验中模拟针刺报告指南的比较分析]

[Comparative analysis of the reporting guidelines on simulated acupuncture in randomized controlled trials of acupuncture].

作者信息

Liu Xiao-Yu, Yan Shi-Yan, Guo Yi, Liu Bao-Yan, Liu Cun-Zhi

机构信息

College of Acupuncture and Massage, Tianjin University of Chinese Medicine, Tianjin 301617, China.

International Acupuncture and Moxibustion Innovation Institute, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing 100029.

出版信息

Zhen Ci Yan Jiu. 2022 Nov 25;47(11):1031-5. doi: 10.13702/j.1000-0607.20210921.

Abstract

The standardized reports of simulated acupuncture control are conductive to understanding and replicating the control method for researchers and readers. At present, the reporting quality of the simulated control in the clinical research of acupuncture is low and there is not a guideline, specification or standard specifically for the report of simulated acupuncture control. In this article, we compared in-depth the checklists between STRICTA (standards for reporting interventions in clinical trials of acupuncture) and TIDieR-Placebo (a guide and checklist for reporting placebo and sham controls), and assessed their applicability in acupuncture clinical research. The checklist of STRICTA is a particular standard for reporting acupuncture intervention measures, including the items of acupuncture control, especially the reporting of the details in acupuncture control; while, the checklist of TIDieR-Placebo is for the comprehensive reporting of placebo or sham control, covering a wider range of content. It specifies the overall reporting of the placebo control setting, intervention delivery and blindness assessment. Although both of the checklists provide a certain reference for reporting simulated acupuncture, they are not applicable for adequately reporting the simulated acupuncture control. Therefore, it is urgent to develop a specific guideline for reporting simulated acupuncture control so as to improve the reporting quality.

摘要

模拟针刺对照的标准化报告有助于研究人员和读者理解并复制对照方法。目前,针刺临床研究中模拟对照的报告质量较低,且尚无专门针对模拟针刺对照报告的指南、规范或标准。在本文中,我们深入比较了STRICTA(针刺临床试验干预报告标准)和TIDieR-Placebo(安慰剂和假对照报告指南及清单)之间的清单,并评估了它们在针刺临床研究中的适用性。STRICTA清单是报告针刺干预措施的特定标准,包括针刺对照项目,尤其是针刺对照细节的报告;而TIDieR-Placebo清单用于安慰剂或假对照的全面报告,涵盖范围更广。它规定了安慰剂对照设置、干预实施和盲法评估的总体报告。虽然这两个清单都为报告模拟针刺提供了一定参考,但它们并不适用于充分报告模拟针刺对照。因此,迫切需要制定一份报告模拟针刺对照的具体指南,以提高报告质量。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验