Objective To systematically evaluate the quality of published pharmacoeconomics studies on Chinese patent medicines for neoplasms. Methods Datasets including CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, SinoMed, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMbase were searched to collect pharmacoeconomics studies of Chinese patent medicines in neoplasms from the establishment of the database to September 30, 2022. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) and quality of health economics studies (QHES) were used to evaluate the reporting quality and methodological quality. Results A total of 25 studies were included, with an average CHEERS 2022 coincidence rate of 40.09% and an average QHES score of 53.2. Conclusion The quantity and quality of pharmacoeconomics studies on Chinese patent medicines in neoplasms are insufficient and flawed. It is suggested to strenthen the collaboration between scientific research institutions and hospitals and standardize the pharmacoeconomics studies on Chinese patent medicines in neoplasms to provide hygienic decision-making evidence for Chinese patent medicines in neoplasms.
ObjectiveThis study aims to conduct a systematic review and quality assessment of published domestic and foreign studies on the pharmacoeconomics of Chinese patent medicines, with the goal of identifying relevant issues and proposing improvement suggestions. MethodsThe methods used in this study involved systematic searches of the CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, and PubMed databases for domestic and foreign studies related to the pharmacoeconomics of Chinese patent medicines, with a search deadline of May 20, 2022. The studies were evaluated systematically based on various aspects such as title, year, author, journal, research perspective, research type, disease area, research object, research design type, research method, application model, model calibration, sensitivity analysis, cost calculation, effectiveness indicators, and adverse reaction comparison. The evaluation of report quality and methodological quality was conducted using the consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) and the quality of health economic studies (QHES) tools, respectively. ResultsThis study included a total of 249 articles, including 247 in Chinese and 2 in English. The first article on the pharmacoeconomics of Chinese patent medicine was published in 2000. The diseases studied covered 59.26% of the ICD-11 disease areas. Articles reporting on the research perspective accounted for 16.87% of the total number of studies, while 32.4% of studies provided an explanation of the research type. The main method used was cost-effectiveness analysis, accounting for 86.75% of the studies, and the main cost component was direct medical costs, accounting for 89.56%. The primary effectiveness indicator was the overall effective rate, accounting for 78.31% of the studies. The average compliance rate with the CHEERS 2022 standard was 43.58%, and the average QHES score was 56.7. ConclusionA considerable part of the existing research on the pharmacoeconomics of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) suffers from problems such as the lack of research methods or non-standardized methods. Therefore, the relevant research abilities of researchers who conduct TCM pharmacoeconomic research need to be improved.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the implementability of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) guidelines in the field of paediatrics. MethodsWe searched the paediatrics-related TCM guidelines published in CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, SinoMed and PubMed databases, and related websites from inception to November 1, 2023. The implementability of the included guidelines was evaluated using the clinical practice guideline implementability assessment tool. ResultsA total of 47 guidelines were included, covering 37 paediatric diseases and recommending 27 TCM therapies, including TCM decoction, Chinese patent medicines, acupuncture, paediatric massage, and acupoints. The results of the guideline accessibility evaluation showed that, in terms of the overall quality of accessibility, 5 guidelines (10.6%) were of high grade, 12 guidelines (25.5%) were of medium grade, and 30 guidelines (63.8%) were of low grade. With the exception of accessibility (multi-channel access methods) and communicability, which was of high quality, there is room for improvement in all areas, particularly in the areas of applicability and ease of recognition. ConclusionThe overall quality of implementability of the included paediatric TCM guidelines was low, and it is recommended that in the process of developing paediatric TCM guidelines in the future, we focus on improving the quality of implementability of the guidelines themselves from the source, so as to promote the implementation and application of the guidelines.