Objective To learn the current situation of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) systematic reviews/meta-analyses published in Chinese journals.
Methods All TCM systematic reviews/meta-analyses published from 1978 to July 31, 2009 were searched in the Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM). According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, relevant information was extracted on the basis of research purpose. Meanwhile, publication year, journal name, author’s district, number of authors and their articles, types of diseases and interventions were took as the indexes, and then descriptive analysis was performed using SPSS 15.0 software.
Results A total of 245 articles including 238 in Chinese and 7 in English were included. All of them were published in 117 different journals from 1998 to 2008, showing an accelerating growth trend of article number. In addition to only one article with first author from Germany, the first author of other 244 were from 24 domestic provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities); the number of authors ranged from 1 to 11; a total of 186 people had published articles as first author, and the number of their published articles ranged from 1 to 29. There were 16 types of diseases according to the International Classification of Diseases 10th Edition (ICD-10). Totally, 218 articles took drugs as interventions (including 106 listed drugs, 25 self-made prescriptions, 70 related to both listed drugs and self-made prescriptions, and 17 without reporting detailed interventions), accounting for 89%; and 27 articles were about non-drug interventions (including 26 about acupuncture and 1 about massage), accounting for 11%. Most (95.8%) of the articles about self-made prescriptions and listed drugs/self-made prescriptions adopted inappropriate pooled analyses.
Conclusion Evidence-based medicine has been spread into the field of TCM, the number of TCM systematic reviews/meta-analyses shows an accelerated growth trend. The types of diseases discussed in the literature were almost the same as the diseases those could be effectively treated by TCM, but there existed imbalance in districts. In the future, systematic review/meta-analysis on drug intervention should aim at Chinese patent medicines and single medicines rather than self-made prescriptions, and should pay more attention to advantageous drugs and advantageous treatments of diseases. Moreover, importance should be also attached to clinical heterogeneity controlling when using acupuncture as a non-drug intervention.
Citation： CHEN Min,HE Jia,XIAO Yang,HUANG Rui,ZHOU Zhifeng,CHEN Chunyu,WANG Fei. Status Quo Analysis on TCM Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses Published in Chinese Journals. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2012, 12(12): 1526-1530. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20120235 Copy