Shu-Fei Fu1, Wai Kun2, Xiao-Xi Zeng3, Li Zhang4, Chung-Wah Cheng2, Lisa Song2, Linda Li-Dan Zhong2, Jia Lin1, Yong-Yan Wang5, Hong-Cai Shang6,7,8, Zhao-Xia Bian9,10. 1. Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Modern Chinese Medicine-Co-constructing State Key Laboratory Breading Base by Province and the Ministry, Tianjin, 300193, China. 2. Hong Kong Chinese Medicine Clinical Study Centre and School of Chinese Medicine, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong SAR, China. 3. West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China. 4. Second Affiliated Hospital of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin, 300150, China. 5. China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100700, China. 6. Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Modern Chinese Medicine-Co-constructing State Key Laboratory Breading Base by Province and the Ministry, Tianjin, 300193, China. shanghongcai@foxmail.com. 7. China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100700, China. shanghongcai@foxmail.com. 8. Key laboratory of Chinese Internal Medicine of Ministry of Education and Beijing, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, 100700, China. shanghongcai@foxmail.com. 9. Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tianjin Key Laboratory of Modern Chinese Medicine-Co-constructing State Key Laboratory Breading Base by Province and the Ministry, Tianjin, 300193, China. bzxiang@hkbu.edu.hk. 10. Hong Kong Chinese Medicine Clinical Study Centre and School of Chinese Medicine, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong SAR, China. bzxiang@hkbu.edu.hk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To survey the reporting quality of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) case reports published in recent years and understand the common problems. The assessment results would lay the foundation for the development of recommendations for case report in Chinese medicine. METHODS: This survey determined the reporting quality of cases with Chinese herbal decoction, Chinese proprietary medicine, acupuncture, moxibustion and other traditional therapies published in 20 core medical journals of China by searching the China Academic Journals Full-text Database from 2006 to 2010. Fifty survey items in 16 domains were used to determine the reporting quality. One point was assigned to each item (Yes=1 point; No=0 point), and total score was 50 points. The domain of treatment was assessed independently, ranging from 2 to 9 items for different TCM interventions. RESULTS: The total of 1,858 case reports, covering 3,417 cases were included to analyze from 13 out of 20 core medical journals of China. There were 74.8% of them did not identify the nature of study in title, while 73.9% did not comprise an abstract. Incomplete reporting was found in discussions/ comment, and only 38.9% had made recommendations or take-away messages. Figures and tables were infrequently used. Three cases cited the full names of patients, but without declaring that any consent was obtained. Over 90% reported the symptoms and signs of TCM, and characteristics on tongue and pulse, but less than 50% did mention other medical history and diagnostic rationale. More than 90% treatments of the included cases were herbal decoction, with clear reporting on the ingredients and dosages. However, the reporting rate of the dosages of each ingredient was just 48.4%. Almost none reported the quality control of crude herbs, manufacturers and lot numbers of herbal proprietary medicine. Besides, advices and precautions on diet, emotions and living were rare to be illustrated. CONCLUSION: Systematic reporting recommendations are urged to develop for improving the contents and format of case reports in TCM.
OBJECTIVE: To survey the reporting quality of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) case reports published in recent years and understand the common problems. The assessment results would lay the foundation for the development of recommendations for case report in Chinese medicine. METHODS: This survey determined the reporting quality of cases with Chinese herbal decoction, Chinese proprietary medicine, acupuncture, moxibustion and other traditional therapies published in 20 core medical journals of China by searching the China Academic Journals Full-text Database from 2006 to 2010. Fifty survey items in 16 domains were used to determine the reporting quality. One point was assigned to each item (Yes=1 point; No=0 point), and total score was 50 points. The domain of treatment was assessed independently, ranging from 2 to 9 items for different TCM interventions. RESULTS: The total of 1,858 case reports, covering 3,417 cases were included to analyze from 13 out of 20 core medical journals of China. There were 74.8% of them did not identify the nature of study in title, while 73.9% did not comprise an abstract. Incomplete reporting was found in discussions/ comment, and only 38.9% had made recommendations or take-away messages. Figures and tables were infrequently used. Three cases cited the full names of patients, but without declaring that any consent was obtained. Over 90% reported the symptoms and signs of TCM, and characteristics on tongue and pulse, but less than 50% did mention other medical history and diagnostic rationale. More than 90% treatments of the included cases were herbal decoction, with clear reporting on the ingredients and dosages. However, the reporting rate of the dosages of each ingredient was just 48.4%. Almost none reported the quality control of crude herbs, manufacturers and lot numbers of herbal proprietary medicine. Besides, advices and precautions on diet, emotions and living were rare to be illustrated. CONCLUSION: Systematic reporting recommendations are urged to develop for improving the contents and format of case reports in TCM.
Entities:
Keywords:
case report; quality assessment; traditional Chinese medicine