Clinical trials comparing acupuncture with biomedical standard care: a criteria-based evaluation of research design and reporting

Author(s): MORRIS, M.

Abstract: Criteria for evaluating clinical trial design and reporting were applied to studies in which acupuncture treatment was compared to biomedical standard care (medication, a medical device or physiotherapy). Studies were selected for systematic review without regard to condition treated or trial outcome. Only 3 of the 23 studies evaluated were rated 'adequate on at least 60% of the 25 criteria; 13 scored between 40% and 60%, while 7 scored below 40%. Of the criteria, 10 were rated adequate on at least 60% of the studies (4 reached the 80% mark), while another 8 were rated 'adequate, on less than 201/o of the studies. Two of the most important criteria for intertreatment trials had widely differing scores: randomization of patients was employed in 20 of the 23 studies (87%) whereas only 4 studies (17%) reported use of a blinded treatment assessor. In addition to revealing a critical need to improve the quality of research design and reporting, the systematic review found that valuable features of the intertreatment research design, including the opportunity for sideby-side comparisons of treatment onset, side-effects and cost, were underutilized.

Zurück | Weiter