Research On Key Questions On Reporting Guideline Of Acupuncture Therapy Network Meta-analysis

Objectives: Based on the concept of evidence-based traditional Chinese medicine management,this study aims to select the key issues of the reporting quality of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis,providing a reference basis for the development of the reporting guideline of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis,and improving the quality of evidence for acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis,to promote the international development of acupuncture therapy with high-quality evidence.Methods:(1)Bibliometric analysis.Systematic search of studies related to of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis design of data extraction table using Excel 2019,extraction and collation of publication characteristics and keywords of included studies,cluster analysis of authors and keywords using VOSviewer software,and the assessment of the reporting quality.(2)Qualitative systematic review.Systematically search of Chinese and English language databases,inclusion of acupuncture therapy reporting quality related studies.A pool of problem items was initially established by using the qualitative systematic review thematic synthesis method to categorize and summarize the problems of the reporting quality of acupuncture therapy.(3)Delphi survey.Based on the question items formed by the qualitative systematic review results,a Delphi expert correspondence questionnaire was prepared,and 16 domestic and foreign experts were selected and two rounds of correspondence were conducted.The selection of key questions was carried out by calculating expert authority coefficients,Kendall coordination coefficients,the mean value of each question entry score,full score ratio,rank sum,and coefficient of variation.Results:(1)Bibliometric analysis of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis.A total of 113 publications were included,with a significant increase in the number of publications after 2019.73 journals published relevant studies.The more prominent contribution was made by Guangzhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine,represented by Jinhuan Zhang,but there was less cooperative exchange between different groups.Hot keywords were mainly focused on acupuncture-related measures,disease types and clinical efficacy.The overall reporting quality of the included studies showed moderate quality.(2)Systematic review of reporting guidelines for acupuncture therapy study.A total of 66 studies were included,covering four different countries,with the vast majority of studies from China.Five studies were rated as moderate quality in terms of methodological quality and 51 studies were rated as high quality.A thematic synthesis of the included studies on the issues of reporting specifications for acupuncture therapy summarized 22 issue items in seven categories,including title,abstract,introduction,methods,results,discussion,and other reporting specification issues.(3)Study of key issues in the reporting guideline of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis.The positive expert coefficient for the first round of correspondence was 100%(16/16),with an expert authority coefficient of 0.88 and a Kendall coordination coefficient of 0.23(p<0.05).The positive expert coefficient for the second round of correspondence was 93.75%(15/16),with an expert authority coefficient of 0.89 and a Kendall coordination coefficient of 0.30(p<0.05).Based on the results of both phases and the opinions of the experts,a list of 21 key questions on the reporting specification of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis was finally selected regarding the need to report details of acupuncture interventions(e.g.,type of acupuncture,acupoints used,number of needles inserted,depth of inserted,duration of needle retention,acupuncture technique,acupuncture treatment course,etc.),diagnostic criteria of diseases or traditional Chinese medicine symptoms,and qualifications of acupuncturists.Of these,the only three key questions answered by the network meta-analysis reporting specification(PRISMA-NMA)are abstract,protocol and registration,and funding source,while the remaining 19 are all acupuncture therapy-related reporting specification questions.Conclusion: Research on the reporting guideline for network meta-analysis of acupuncture therapy has continued to attract the attention of domestic and international researchers,but the requirements and formats regarding the reporting guideline for network meta-analysis of acupuncture therapy have not yet been unified.The current key issues are mainly focused on the title,abstract,preface,methods,results,discussion,and other reporting specification issues,such as the specific type of acupuncture therapy not reported in the title,and the details of acupuncture interventions(e.g.,needle tool type,acupuncture technique,acupuncture point selection,acupuncture frequency,etc.)not reported in the inclusion and exclusion criteria section of the methods.In this regard future studies should incorporate the exclusive features of acupuncture therapy and develop norms for reporting acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis to promote the promotion and application of acupuncture evidence.