L Susan Wieland1, Ruth Brassington2, Geraldine Macdonald3. 1. Cochrane Complementary Medicine, Center for Integrative Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore MD, USA. 2. Cochrane Neuromuscular, Queen Square Centre for Neuromuscular Diseases, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery and UCL Institute of Neurology, London, UK. 3. Cochrane Developmental, Psychosocial and Learning Problems, School of Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Traditional East Asian medicine (TEAM) is widely used in Asia and increasingly in the West. Systematic reviews (SRs) are the best summaries of the potential benefits or harms of interventions, and Cochrane is a leading international SR organization. Cochrane perspectives on the barriers to the initiation and completion of Cochrane SRs of TEAM therapies were solicited. METHODS: Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs) were identified from the online listing of CRGs at cochrane.org and a link to an online survey was e-mailed to the primary contact for each CRG. RESULTS: Forty-eight responses were received on behalf of 49/53 (92%) CRGs. Most CRGs had experience producing TEAM reviews, primarily in acupuncture or herbal medicine. The main barriers to taking on a new TEAM review were difficulty in understanding and assessing the intervention, and the low priority of TEAM topics. Problems with the quality and accessibility of randomized trials in TEAM were cited as a major concern. CRGs suggested that the quality and accessibility of randomized trials should be improved, that the methodological and language expertise of authors should be enhanced, and that further peer review expertise should be made available to CRGs. CONCLUSIONS: TEAM topics are covered in Cochrane reviews but are often considered low-priority. This survey highlights Cochrane concerns about the quality of the underlying evidence base and the training of the author teams as barriers to successful SR completion. Specific approaches are proposed to increase the number of TEAM reviews and address the limitations of TEAM research processes within Cochrane.
INTRODUCTION: Traditional East Asian medicine (TEAM) is widely used in Asia and increasingly in the West. Systematic reviews (SRs) are the best summaries of the potential benefits or harms of interventions, and Cochrane is a leading international SR organization. Cochrane perspectives on the barriers to the initiation and completion of Cochrane SRs of TEAM therapies were solicited. METHODS: Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs) were identified from the online listing of CRGs at cochrane.org and a link to an online survey was e-mailed to the primary contact for each CRG. RESULTS: Forty-eight responses were received on behalf of 49/53 (92%) CRGs. Most CRGs had experience producing TEAM reviews, primarily in acupuncture or herbal medicine. The main barriers to taking on a new TEAM review were difficulty in understanding and assessing the intervention, and the low priority of TEAM topics. Problems with the quality and accessibility of randomized trials in TEAM were cited as a major concern. CRGs suggested that the quality and accessibility of randomized trials should be improved, that the methodological and language expertise of authors should be enhanced, and that further peer review expertise should be made available to CRGs. CONCLUSIONS: TEAM topics are covered in Cochrane reviews but are often considered low-priority. This survey highlights Cochrane concerns about the quality of the underlying evidence base and the training of the author teams as barriers to successful SR completion. Specific approaches are proposed to increase the number of TEAM reviews and address the limitations of TEAM research processes within Cochrane.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cochrane; Traditional East Asian medicine; survey; systematic reviews
Authors: Vincent C H Chung; Robin S T Ho; Xinyin Wu; Daisy H Y Fung; Xin Lai; Justin C W Wu; Samuel Y S Wong Journal: J Ethnopharmacol Date: 2014-12-29 Impact factor: 4.360
Authors: Chung-Wah Cheng; Tai-Xiang Wu; Hong-Cai Shang; You-Ping Li; Douglas G Altman; David Moher; Zhao-Xiang Bian Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2017-06-27 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Hugh MacPherson; Douglas G Altman; Richard Hammerschlag; Li Youping; Wu Taixiang; Adrian White; David Moher Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2010-06-08 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Sina Kim; Hye Seon Sagong; Jae Cheol Kong; Jun-Yong Choi; Myeong Soo Lee; L Susan Wieland; Eric Manheimer; Byung-Cheul Shin Journal: Acupunct Med Date: 2013-11-26 Impact factor: 2.267