Cochrane systematic reviews in acupuncture

Methodological diversity in database searching

Amit Sood, Richa Sood, Brent A Bauer, Jon Owen Ebbert

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Since the early 1970s, the efficacy of acupuncture for treating clinical conditions has been evaluated in several hundred randomized trials. Results from these trials have been synthesized in systematic reviews. A well-designed systematic review provides the highest level of evidence for establishing the efficacy of a clinical intervention. Objectives: The present study assesses the source of original literature contributing to Cochrane reviews on acupuncture. Databases searched to retrieve original studies are evaluated. The distribution of controlled trials in acupuncture across different topic areas and journals, the ability of the reviews to provide conclusive results, and the proportion of original studies indexed with MEDLINE® are evaluated. Methods: Systematic reviews on acupuncture were extracted from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The key search term used was "acupuncture." When more than one systematic review was retrieved on the same topic, the most recent review was included. Indexing of individual clinical trials with MEDLINE was searched using the Single Citation Matcher in PubMed. Results: A total of 94 papers were retrieved from the Cochrane database, of which 10 were included in the analysis. The most common subject areas were related to chronic pain. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in the number of databases searched (median 5, range 3-12). A total of 69% (74/108) papers were indexed with PubMed. Only 13% (14/108) of the papers were published in the primary acupuncture journals. Conclusive statements about the efficacy of acupuncture were made in only 2 of the 10 systematic reviews. Conclusions: Considerable methodological diversity exists in the comprehensiveness of database searches for Cochrane systematic reviews on acupuncture. This diversity makes the reviews prone to bias and adds another layer of complexity in interpreting the acupuncture literature.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)719-722
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine
Volume11
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2005

Fingerprint

Acupuncture
Databases
PubMed
MEDLINE
Chronic Pain
Clinical Trials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Complementary and alternative medicine
  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

Cochrane systematic reviews in acupuncture : Methodological diversity in database searching. / Sood, Amit; Sood, Richa; Bauer, Brent A; Ebbert, Jon Owen.

In: Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, Vol. 11, No. 4, 08.2005, p. 719-722.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ab4bb1b9ea6444a99c94b99c17d01388,
title = "Cochrane systematic reviews in acupuncture: Methodological diversity in database searching",
abstract = "Background: Since the early 1970s, the efficacy of acupuncture for treating clinical conditions has been evaluated in several hundred randomized trials. Results from these trials have been synthesized in systematic reviews. A well-designed systematic review provides the highest level of evidence for establishing the efficacy of a clinical intervention. Objectives: The present study assesses the source of original literature contributing to Cochrane reviews on acupuncture. Databases searched to retrieve original studies are evaluated. The distribution of controlled trials in acupuncture across different topic areas and journals, the ability of the reviews to provide conclusive results, and the proportion of original studies indexed with MEDLINE{\circledR} are evaluated. Methods: Systematic reviews on acupuncture were extracted from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The key search term used was {"}acupuncture.{"} When more than one systematic review was retrieved on the same topic, the most recent review was included. Indexing of individual clinical trials with MEDLINE was searched using the Single Citation Matcher in PubMed. Results: A total of 94 papers were retrieved from the Cochrane database, of which 10 were included in the analysis. The most common subject areas were related to chronic pain. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in the number of databases searched (median 5, range 3-12). A total of 69{\%} (74/108) papers were indexed with PubMed. Only 13{\%} (14/108) of the papers were published in the primary acupuncture journals. Conclusive statements about the efficacy of acupuncture were made in only 2 of the 10 systematic reviews. Conclusions: Considerable methodological diversity exists in the comprehensiveness of database searches for Cochrane systematic reviews on acupuncture. This diversity makes the reviews prone to bias and adds another layer of complexity in interpreting the acupuncture literature.",
author = "Amit Sood and Richa Sood and Bauer, {Brent A} and Ebbert, {Jon Owen}",
year = "2005",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1089/acm.2005.11.719",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "719--722",
journal = "Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine",
issn = "1075-5535",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cochrane systematic reviews in acupuncture

T2 - Methodological diversity in database searching

AU - Sood, Amit

AU - Sood, Richa

AU - Bauer, Brent A

AU - Ebbert, Jon Owen

PY - 2005/8

Y1 - 2005/8

N2 - Background: Since the early 1970s, the efficacy of acupuncture for treating clinical conditions has been evaluated in several hundred randomized trials. Results from these trials have been synthesized in systematic reviews. A well-designed systematic review provides the highest level of evidence for establishing the efficacy of a clinical intervention. Objectives: The present study assesses the source of original literature contributing to Cochrane reviews on acupuncture. Databases searched to retrieve original studies are evaluated. The distribution of controlled trials in acupuncture across different topic areas and journals, the ability of the reviews to provide conclusive results, and the proportion of original studies indexed with MEDLINE® are evaluated. Methods: Systematic reviews on acupuncture were extracted from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The key search term used was "acupuncture." When more than one systematic review was retrieved on the same topic, the most recent review was included. Indexing of individual clinical trials with MEDLINE was searched using the Single Citation Matcher in PubMed. Results: A total of 94 papers were retrieved from the Cochrane database, of which 10 were included in the analysis. The most common subject areas were related to chronic pain. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in the number of databases searched (median 5, range 3-12). A total of 69% (74/108) papers were indexed with PubMed. Only 13% (14/108) of the papers were published in the primary acupuncture journals. Conclusive statements about the efficacy of acupuncture were made in only 2 of the 10 systematic reviews. Conclusions: Considerable methodological diversity exists in the comprehensiveness of database searches for Cochrane systematic reviews on acupuncture. This diversity makes the reviews prone to bias and adds another layer of complexity in interpreting the acupuncture literature.

AB - Background: Since the early 1970s, the efficacy of acupuncture for treating clinical conditions has been evaluated in several hundred randomized trials. Results from these trials have been synthesized in systematic reviews. A well-designed systematic review provides the highest level of evidence for establishing the efficacy of a clinical intervention. Objectives: The present study assesses the source of original literature contributing to Cochrane reviews on acupuncture. Databases searched to retrieve original studies are evaluated. The distribution of controlled trials in acupuncture across different topic areas and journals, the ability of the reviews to provide conclusive results, and the proportion of original studies indexed with MEDLINE® are evaluated. Methods: Systematic reviews on acupuncture were extracted from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The key search term used was "acupuncture." When more than one systematic review was retrieved on the same topic, the most recent review was included. Indexing of individual clinical trials with MEDLINE was searched using the Single Citation Matcher in PubMed. Results: A total of 94 papers were retrieved from the Cochrane database, of which 10 were included in the analysis. The most common subject areas were related to chronic pain. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in the number of databases searched (median 5, range 3-12). A total of 69% (74/108) papers were indexed with PubMed. Only 13% (14/108) of the papers were published in the primary acupuncture journals. Conclusive statements about the efficacy of acupuncture were made in only 2 of the 10 systematic reviews. Conclusions: Considerable methodological diversity exists in the comprehensiveness of database searches for Cochrane systematic reviews on acupuncture. This diversity makes the reviews prone to bias and adds another layer of complexity in interpreting the acupuncture literature.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=24644514280&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=24644514280&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/acm.2005.11.719

DO - 10.1089/acm.2005.11.719

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 719

EP - 722

JO - Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine

JF - Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine

SN - 1075-5535

IS - 4

ER -