ObjectivesTo evaluate the methodology quality and report quality of the published systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) of pediatric tuina domestically and abroad.MethodsCBM, VIP, CNKI, WanFang Data, PubMed, EMbase, and The Cochrane Library were electronically searched to collect published pediatric tuina SRs/MAs from inception to December 10th, 2018. The SRs/MAs which includes scale evaluation used AMSTAR2 and the PRISMA report quality evaluation tool to systematically review methodology, adopts Excel to carry out data collation and statistical analysis. ResultsA total of 18 studies (14 in Chinese and 4 in English) on the SRs/MAs of pediatric tuina were finally included. In terms of methodological quality, 6 studies were of low quality and 12 studies were of very low quality. All studies did not explain the reasons for adopting a particular research design type, and few of them explained the pre-plan, exclusion list, reasons and funding. In terms of report quality, 7 studies were relatively complete, 10 studies had certain defects and one study had serious defects. The existing problems were program and registration, comprehensive retrieval, information sources, financial support and so on. ConclusionsSRs/MAs of pediatric tuina have different degrees of issues in terms of methodological quality and report quality which still require further improvement and continuous strengthening.
ObjectiveTo provide an overview of systematic reviews on the efficacy and safety of massage for the treatment of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy.MethodsCNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, CBM, PubMed, The Cochrane Library and EMbase databases were electronically searched to collect the systematic reviews on the efficacy and safety of massage for the treatment of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy from inception to December 30th, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened the literature and extracted the data, applied the AMSTAR2 scale to evaluate its methodological quality, and GRADE to evaluate the quality of the evidence.ResultsA total of 7 systematic reviews/meta-analysis were included. The AMSTAR2 scale evaluation showed that the quality of the included studies was extremely low. The GRADE evidence grading results showed that the quality of the VAS score outcome index of the two literatures was intermediate, and the quality of the OASCSR outcome index of one literature was intermediate. The quality of the remaining outcome indicators reported is low or very low.ConclusionThe available evidence shows that the efficacy and safety of manual treatment of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy is acceptable, but the overall methodological quality of the systematic review is extremely low, and the quality level of evidence is generally low. The future clinical trials and systematic reviews should be strictly followed. The scientific research design of the medical science provides high-quality evidence and provides reference for clinical practice.