Objective The aim of this study is to construct reporting standards for acupuncture network meta-analysis, providing guidance to enhance the quality of evidence reported in acupuncture therapy research. Methods A Delphi questionnaire was developed based on the preliminary research and literature findings, 20 experts were selected for correspondence to determine the final checklists of items, and then finalized the list of report items. Results A total of two rounds of Delphi questionnaires were made. The expert positivity coefficient (100%), the expert familiarity (0.80) and the expert authority (0.83) were the same in both rounds, the Kendall's coordination coefficients were 0.117 (P<0.001) and 0.332 (P<0.001), respectively, which ultimately led to the formation of the 7 fields of title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion and other, including 23 specific items of the acupuncture-related therapies NMA standards. Conclusion The PRINMA-A statement will help to improve the reporting quality of evidence on acupuncture-related therapies, promote the dissemination and translation of evidence on acupuncture-related therapies.
As the volume of medical research using large language models (LLM) surges, the need for standardized and transparent reporting standards becomes increasingly critical. In January 2025, Nature Medicine published statement titled by TRIPOD-LLM reporting guideline for studies using large language models. This represents the first comprehensive reporting framework specifically tailored for studies that develop prediction models based on LLM. It comprises a checklist with 19 main items (encompassing 50 sub-items), a flowchart, and an abstract checklist (containing 12 items). This article provides an interpretation of TRIPOD-LLM’s development methods, primary content, scope, and the specific details of its items. The goal is to help researchers, clinicians, editors, and healthcare decision-makers to deeply understand and correctly apply TRIPOD-LLM, thereby improving the quality and transparency of LLM medical research reporting and promoting the standardized and ethical integration of LLM into healthcare.
Based on the PRISMA 2009 checklist, the study analyzed current status and reporting quality of systematic reviews of animal experiments, and consulted experts in relevant fields to form an initial entry pool of reporting checklists for systematic reviews of animal experiments in traditional Chinese medicine (PRISMA-ATCM). Then, the initial entry pool was improved through 2 rounds of Delphi expert consultation. Finally, the items were revised through the consensus meeting, and the final PRISMA-ATCM was formed. Of the 27 items on the PRISMA checklist, 12 were revised and expanded, specifically relating to TCM interventions and animal characteristics. The publication of the PRISMA-ATCM will improve the transparency and standardization of systematic reviews of animal experiments in Chinese medicine.
ObjectiveTo investigate the application status of survival analysis in studies published in Chinese oncology journals, and assess their reporting quality and summarize the existing problems, so as to promote the application of survival analysis and reporting quality. MethodsStudies that used survival analysis were collected from 1 492 studies published in Chinese Journal of Oncology, Chinese Journal of Clinical Oncology, Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology and Chinese Journal of Cancer Prevention and Treatment in 2013. The application status of survival analysis of included studies was analysed and their reporting quality was evaluated. ResultsA total of 242 survival analysis studies were included. Among them, the utilization rates of Kaplan-Meier method, life table method, log-rank test, Breslow test and Cox proportional hazards model were 91.74%, 3.72%, 78.51%, 0.41% and 46.28%, respectively. 112 studies did multivariate analysis through Cox proportional hazards model. A total of 396 end points and 10 different types of survival time were reported. Overall survival (OS) was reported in 233 studies (92.15%). Survival terms were defined to 158 end points (39.90%) of 103 studies (42.56%). The follow-up rates were mentioned in 155 studies (64.05%), of which 4 studies were under 80% and the lowest was 75.25%, 55 studies were 100%. The main problems of survival analysis studies published in Chinese journals were as follows:None of the studies which used Cox proportional hazards model reported the proportional hazards assumption. None of the studies used the method of parametric survival analysis. 130 studies (53.72%) did not use the method of multiple factor analysis. 139 studies (57.44%) did not define the survival terms. Only 11 of 100 studies which reported loss to follow-up had stated how to treat it in the analysis. None of the studies reported the methods of calculating sample size. None of the studies reported the censoring proportion. ConclusionThe methods of survival analysis are used in a low rate in studies published in Chinese oncology journals, and the overall reporting quality of survival analyses is poor. So the reporting guideline of survival analysis should be developed and the authors should be encouraged to cooperate with professional statisticians, in order to improve the design, analysis and reporting quality of survival analysis studies.
ObjectiveTo select the key questions of the reporting quality of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis. MethodsA question pool about reporting quality of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis was conducted by preliminary literature research and qualitative systematic review. A correspondence questionnaire was designed and the selection of key questions was carried out through two rounds of expert consultation using the Delphi method. ResultsA total of 21 key questions were selected for the network meta-analysis report standard of acupuncture, including whether to report details of acupuncture interventions (e.g., needle type, acupoints used, number of needles inserted, depth of needle insertion, retention time, needling techniques, and treatment duration), diagnostic criteria for diseases or traditional Chinese medicine syndromes, and qualifications of acupuncture practitioners. Of these, the only three key questions answered by the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and network meta-analysis (PRISMA-NMA) were summary, protocol and registration, and source of funding, while the remaining 19 were specific to acupuncture-related report standards. ConclusionThe conducted key question on reporting guideline of acupuncture network meta-analysis can improve the standardization and rigor of relevant research and better utilize its academic and clinical value.
This study aimed to provide suggestions for future researchers to select and optimize sham acupuncture reporting guidelines in acupuncture clinical trials. Through qualitative analysis, we compared the basic information and concrete contents between Acupuncture Controls gUideline for Reporting humAn Trials and Experiments (ACURATE) and SHam Acupuncture REporting guidelines in clinical trials (SHARE) developed by researchers from China and Korea. In addition, the similarities and differences of the two guidelines were illustrated through a specific case. We found that the two guidelines had their own characteristics and emphasis in content, but both emphasized the reports of detailed information and background factors of sham acupuncture compared with the previous STRICTA and TIDieR-Placebo checklist. In terms of item division, we found that the ACURATE split the same topic into several items to emphasize the importance of each item content. SHARE emphasized the comprehensive reports of sham acupuncture by combining several items into a single item. In terms of item content, ACURATE also focused on combination therapy, the information regarding sham acupuncture provided to participants, and any differences in treatment settings between versus/sham acupuncture, which had some referential meaning for setting sham acupuncture control. SHARE also focused on sham acupuncture detailed information, practitioner, and modifications, etc. Case analysis showed that there were some "not reported" or "partially reported" items in both guidelines. Therefore, it is suggested that researchers can use the above two guidelines to complement and learn from each other to report sham acupuncture. In addition, it is necessary for researchers to verify the operability and practicability of the above two guidelines, and provide suggestions for optimizing and updating them in the future.
ObjectiveTo develop reporting guideline for dose-response meta-analysis (DMA), so as to help Chinese authors to understand DMA better and to promote the reporting quality of DMA conducted by them. MethodPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, and WanFang Data were searched from Jan 1st 2011 to Dec 30th 2015 to collect DMA papers published by Chinese authors. The number of these publications by years, whether and what kind of reporting guideline was used, and whether the DMA method claimed in these publications was correct were analysed. Then we drafted a checklist of items for reporting DMA, and organized a discussion meeting with experts from the fields of DMA, evidence-based medicine, clinical epidemiology, and clinicians to collect suggestions for revising the draft reporting guideline for DMA. ResultsOnly 33.73% of the publications clarified it is a DMA on the title and 48.02% of them reported risk of bias. Almost 38.49% of the publications didn't use any reporting guidelines. Fourteen of them claimed an incorrect use of methodology. We primarily took account for 47 potential items related to DMA based on our literature analysis results and existing reporting guidelines for other types of meta-analyses. After the discussion meeting with 6 experts, we revised the items, and finally the G-Dose checklist with 43 items for reporting DMA was developed. ConclusionThere is a lack of attention on reporting guidelines in Chinese authors and evidence suggests these authors may be at risk of incomplete understanding on reporting guidelines. It is strongly recommended to use reporting guidelines for DMA and other types of meta-analyses in Chinese authors.
在缺乏数据进行 Meta 分析的系统评价中，通常使用替代合成方法，但这些方法却很少被报道，而模糊的方法阐述可能会导致人们质疑系统评价结果的真实性。无 Meta 分析数据合成（SWiM）报告规范是用于指导采用了替代合成方法评估干预措施效应的系统评价进行清晰报告的规范。本文介绍了 SWiM 规范的研制过程及 9 个 SWiM 报告条目及其相应的解释与示例。
In order to standardize the reporting of sham acupuncture and improve the quality of reporting of sham acupuncture, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine has developed a specific reporting guideline for sham acupuncture: SHam Acupuncture REporting (SHARE) which contains ten categories with nineteen items. This paper introduces the development methods and main contents of the guidelines to provide a reference for researchers to correctly understand and reasonably apply the guidelines.
ObjectiveSham acupuncture control is a commonly employed method to assess the specific effects of acupuncture in clinical trials. However, due to the absence of specific reporting standards, the reporting quality of sham acupuncture in these trials is low. In order to standardize the reporting of sham acupuncture and improve the reporting quality of sham acupuncture, our project team has developed SHam Acupuncture REporting guidelines and a checklist in clinical trials (SHARE). MethodsThe development process included four parts: we conducted literature research to form initial items of sham acupuncture reporting; two rounds of Delphi surveys were carried out to evaluate the reporting necessity of these initial items; two expert consensus meetings were held to further discuss and agree upon the Delphi results and approve the SHARE checklist; a pilot testing was conducted to assess the feasibility and practicality of the list and make necessary revisions to generate the final SHARE checklist. ResultsThe SHARE checklist consisted of 10 categories with 19 items. The requirements for reporting sham acupuncture primarily focused on sham acupuncture detailed information as well as relevant background factors. ConclusionThe SHARE serves as specialized reporting guidelines for sham acupuncture that offers clear guidance on comprehensive and concise reporting of sham acupuncture.