Objectives To evaluate the methodological bias and the reliability of the conclusions of systematic reviews on acupuncture for polycystic ovary syndrome. Methods We comprehensively searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI and WanFang Data to collect systematic reviews on acupuncture for polycystic ovary syndrome from the establishment time of databases to January 5th, 2018. The AMSTAR tool was applied for methodological quality assessment of included studies and the GRADE system was applied for evidence quality assessment of included outcomes of systematic reviews. Results A total of 11 systematic reviews were included. The results of assessment using AMSTAR showed that, among the 11 items, most problems occurred in Item 5 " Were there any lists of research articles included and excluded”, followed by Item 1" Was an‘a prior’design provided?”and Item 11" Were potential conflict of interest included?”. GRADE grading results showed that quality of evidence for the outcome measure were" low”or" very low”. Conclusions Current acupuncture treatment of polycystic ovary syndrome has a certain effect, however, the quality of evidence is low. Thus, physicians should apply the evidence to make decision on acupuncture for polycystic ovary syndrome with caution in clinical practice and consider the actual situation, combined with the patient’s value preferences and economic factors.
Depending on different designs of original studies, systematic reviews of diagnostic studies could be categorized into two kinds:one is based on diagnostic randomized controlled trials, of which the GRADE rating approach is similar to that of interventional systematic reviews; and the other is based on diagnostic accuracy tests, of which the GRADE rating approach is introduced in this article. This article explains the application of GRADE in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy tests mainly from the angle of theoretical analysis, including rationales, methods, and challenges.
The formation, evaluation and grade division of real-world evidence (RWE) are bottlenecks restricting the in-depth development and scientific application of real-world study methods. This paper briefly reviewed the design grade and evidence grade of clinical medical research, and proposed the key points of evidence grade of real-world clinical research, including emphasizing the comprehensive evaluation of internal authenticity and external authenticity, determining the "starting point" of real-world evidence, and using the real-world evidence quality evaluation method. Based on the internationally recognized "grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE)", combined with the classification and characteristics of real-world evidence, a preliminary grading scheme was formed. An example was given to illustrate the grading suggestion.
The primary advantage of network meta-analysis is the capability to quantify and compare different interventions for the same diseases and rank their benefits or harms according to a certain health outcome. The inclusion of a variety of interventions has increased the complexity of the conclusions drawing from a network meta-analysis, and based on the ranking results alone may lead to misleading conclusions. At present, there are no accepted standards for the conclusion drawing from a network meta-analysis. In November 2020, based on the evidence certainty results of network meta-analysis, the GRADE (Grades of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) working group proposed two approaches to draw conclusions from a network meta-analysis: the partially contextualised framework and the minimally contextualised framework. This paper aimed to introduce principles and procedures of the minimal contextualised framework through a specific example to provide guidance for the network meta-analysis authors in China to present and interpret the results using minimally contextualised framework.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the methodological bias and the reliability of the conclusions of systematic reviews (SRs) about traditional Chinese medicine for essential hypertension. MethodsWe comprehensively searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane library (Issue 4, 2014), CBM, CNKI and WanFang Data to collect SRs of traditional Chinese medicine for essential hypertension from the establishment time of databases to April 30th, 2014. The AMSTAR tool was applied for methodological quality assessment of included studies, and the GRADE system was applied for evidence quality assessment of included outcomes of SRs. ResultsA total of 12 SRs involving 31 outcomes were included, of which 11 SRs focused on the comparison of therapeutic effects between traditional Chinese medicine combined with western medicine and western medicine alone. Nine SRs adopted Jadad tool to assess methodological quality of included original studies. The results of assessment using AMSTAR showed that, among 11 items, there were the most problems concerning Item 1 "Was an 'a prior' design provided?" (none of the 12 SRs provided it); followed by Item 11 "Were potential conflict of interest included?" (nine SRs didn't described it), and Item 6 "Were the characteristics of included studies provided" (six SRs didn't provided it). The results of grading showed that, 29 outcomes were graded as "low" or "very low" quality. The main factors contributed to downgrading evidence quality were limitations (31 outcomes), followed by imprecision (12 outcomes), and inconsistency (13 outcomes). ConclusionCurrently, the methodological quality of SRs about traditional Chinese medicine for essential hypertension was poor on the whole, with low quality of evidence as well as lack of enough attention to the end outcomes of patients with essential hypertension. Thus, physicians should apply the evidence to make decision about traditional Chinese medicine for essential hypertension with caution in clinical practice.
ObjectivesTo evaluate the methodological bias and the reliability of the conclusions of systematic reviews (SRs) of lanthanum carbonate in the treatment of chronic kidney disease with hyperphosphatemia. MethodsWe electronically searched databases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, PROSPERO, CNKI, CBM, WanFang Data and VIP to collect systematic reviews and meta-analysis about lanthanum carbonate in the treatment of chronic kidney disease with hyperphosphatemia from inception to August 31st, 2016. Two reviewers independently screened literature and extracted data, then AMSTAR tool was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies and the GRADE tool was used to grade the evidence quality of outcome measures included in the SRs. ResultsA total of eight relevant SRs were included and containing three main outcome measures. The assessment results of AMSTAR tool suggested that:four SRs were of high quality, and the other four were of medium quality. GRADE results showed:for serum phosphorus level, compared with placebo, the quality of the evidence of three SRs were medium, low and very low; compared with calcium carbonate or conventional phosphorus binder, four SRs were low, low, low and very low; compared with sevelamer, one SR was low. For serum calcium level, compared with placebo, the quality of the evidence of three SRs were high, medium and low, respectively; compared with calcium carbonate or conventional phosphorus binder, five SRs were low, low, low, very low and very low; compared with sevelamer, one SR was very low. For serum iPTH level, compared with placebo, the quality of the evidence of three SRs were medium, low and very low; compared with calcium carbonate or conventional phosphorus binder, five SRs were medium, low, low, very low and very low; compared with sevelamer, one SR was low. ConclusionAt present, methodological quality assessment for the treatment of hyperphosphatemia in chronic kidney disease with lanthanum carbonate is generally not high and the level of evidence for the conclusion is generally low. In drug safety, especially in the occurrence of adverse events of the digestive system is still controversial, and a large amount of high quality experimental is needed to demonstrate the safety of its long-term use. Clinicians need to be cautious in using these evidence to make clinical decisions.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of methodology and evidence of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) of acupuncture therapy for bronchial asthma. MethodsCNKI, CBM, VIP, WanFang Data, PubMed, The Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were electronically searched to collect SRs/MAs of acupuncture therapy for bronchial asthma from inception to October 31, 2021. Four reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and applied the AMSTAR 2 to evaluate the quality of methodology of the included studies and the GRADE system to assess the certainty of evidence for outcomes. ResultsA total of 14 SRs/MAs were included and their main conclusions were that acupuncture therapy was beneficial in improving the clinical efficacy of bronchial asthma treatment. The evaluation of AMSTAR 2 showed that the methodological quality of all studies was all extremely low. The evidence grading of GRADE system showed that, in the total of 59 outcomes, 7 were graded as medium-level, 24 as low-level, 28 as extremely low-level, and none was graded as high-level. ConclusionThe current evidence shows the advantages of acupuncture therapy for bronchial asthma but the reliability of SRs/MAs is low. High-quality clinical studies are still needed to verify the efficacy of acupuncture therapy for bronchial asthma.
ObjectivesTo evaluate the methodological bias and the reliability of the conclusions of systematic reviews (SRs) on the treatment for acute gout.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI databases were electronically searched to collect published systematic reviews and meta-analyses evaluating drug interventions therapy in acute gout from inception to April 8th 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, assessed the methodological quality of included SRs by the AMSTAR tool, and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for each outcome by the GRADE approach.ResultsA total of seven relevant SRs were included, which contains three main outcome measures. Four SRs contained non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS), three SRs contained colchicine and two SRs contained glucocorticoids. All SRs assessed risk of bias of included original studies. Two used the Jadad scale or modified Jadad scale in this assessment while others used the " assessing risk of bias” tool recommended by Cochrane Collaboration. The assessment results of AMSTAR tool suggested that: three SRs were considered high quality (scores≥9), and the other four were considered moderate quality. GRADE results showed: the quality of the evidence of 11 outcomes was low or very low, and five outcomes was moderate.ConclusionsThe current evidence confirms the effectiveness and safety of several drug interventions in the treatment of acute gout, however, the priority of these drugs is still unclear. We suggest conducting new SRs and updating relevant SRs, to systematically compare different drug interventions therapy in acute gout with the latest evidence. In addition, we still expect to put more efforts in conducting high-quality original studies, in order to fill the gap of relevant fields and improve the level of evidence quality.
The shortage of health workforce in rural and remote areas has been commonly concerned by every country around the word. It is one of world health issues, challenging the aspirations of achieving equity. In this regard, WHO developed the Global Policy Recommendations to improve the accessibility of the health workforce in rural and remote areas through improved retention. This article focuses on the key steps of the policy guideline developed from evidence-based medicine methodology and from angle of guideline development, mainly about background, issues, evidence retrieval and selection, quality grading of evidence, and the forming of recommendation plan, in order to further explore how to correctly understand, obtain, evaluate and apply currently available research evidence, and how to use the GRADE system to make scientific and feasible recommendations in the decision-making process, emphasizing the importance of evidence and the GRADE system in the evidence-based health decision-making.
Objective To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of montelukast in the treatment of acute asthma in adults.Methods Randomized controlled trials ( RCTs) of montelukast in the treatment of acute asthma compared with placebo were searched in Pubmed, Embase, OVID, and Cochrane Library. The quality of included RCTs was evaluated and the data were extracted. Meta-analyses were performed with RevMan 5. 1 software, and the GRADE system was applied to rate the level of evidence and strength of recommendation. Results Five RCTs ( n = 947) were included. Meta-analyses showed that montelukast could statistically improve peak expiratory flow ( PEF) ( MD = 10. 65 [ 2. 81, 18. 49] , P = 0. 008) , reduce the number of patients with oral corticosteroids ( RR=0. 75[ 0. 62, 0. 92] , NNT= 7[ 4, 46] , P =0. 005) , but there were no statistical differences in decreasing the number of patients with hospitalizations ( RR= 0. 78[ 0. 57, 1. 06] , NNT = 19[ 9, + ∞] , P = 0. 110) and treatment failure ( RR = 0. 85[ 0. 67, 1. 09] , NNT=17[ 9, +∞] , P =0. 314) compared with the placebo. Based on GRADE, the level of evidence was low or moderate, and the strength of recommendation was weak. Conclusion Our study suggests montelukast can improve the lung function and reduce the use of systematic corticosteroids in acute asthma, but the potency to reduce the number of patients with hospitalization and treatment failure need to be explored in future.