Evidence-based medicine advocates to support clinical decision-making with the best evidence, which is useful to objectively evaluate the clinical efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine and optimize clinical diagnosis and treatment. However, significant individualized characteristics identified from syndrome differentiation and treatment are incompatible with evidence-based clinical decision-making, which highlights population-level evidence, to some extent. In recent years, a number of new methods and technologies have been introduced into individualized clinical efficacy evaluation research of traditional Chinese medicine to assist managing and processing complex and multivariate information. These methods and technologies share similarities with evidence-based medicine, and are expected to link the clinical practice of traditional Chinese medicine with evidence-based clinical decision-making. They will guide the development of evidence-based clinical decision-making in traditional Chinese medicine.
In the process of evidence-based practice, the evaluation of evidence applicability relied on the subjective judgment of clinicians, while the systematic method of which was still in lack. The complex clinical information of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) enhanced the uncertainty and risk of applying evidence. Based on the analysis of the process of evidence-based practice, this paper introduced the method of TCM evidence applicability evaluation and used the raw data of clinical trials to develop a clinical prediction model to enable the assessment of the evidence applicability on individual patients. The establishment of individual evidence applicability evaluation method could promote the rational application of TCM evidence in the long term.
ObjectivesWith the increasing number of core outcome sets (COS) in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), some problems gradually emerged, which may affect the popularization and application of COS. This paper analyzes the COS research status in the field of TCM based on registry and literature databases, so that researchers may pay attention to it. Methods Registry platforms and literature databases of Chinese and English were both searched from inception to June, 2022. Qualitative analysis was used to analyze the research status of COS. ResultsSeventy-two COS studies were identified from registry platforms, and the results showed some problems, such as uneven disease distribution, insufficient attention to TCM characteristics, unclear COS scope, and insufficient patient and public participation. Ninety-nine studies were identified from different databases, only 7.07% (7/99) of the studies were COS results, and few of them were cited by clinical trials and/or systematic reviews. ConclusionThe authors proposed that standardizing the registration of COS in the field of TCM, improving the methodology of COS studies, expanding the application settings of COS, and strengthening the cooperation of different stakeholder groups are important to ameliorate sustainable development of COS.