Quality of reporting on randomised controlled trials of auriculotherapy for pain.

Published

Journal Article

OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated the quality of reporting for randomised controlled trials of auriculotherapy for pain before and after the implementation of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) guidelines. METHODS: The authors identified randomised controlled trials of auriculotherapy that measured pain or pain medication use as a primary outcome and were published in English in peer-reviewed journals. Proportions of studies that reported STRICTA and CONSORT items were compared for the years before and after implementation of STRICTA (2001) using Fisher's exact tests. Global differences across all study factors were investigated using hierarchical clustering and principle component analysis (PCA). RESULTS: 15 studies met our inclusion criteria. On average, 11 studies (74%) reported STRICTA items and eight studies (54%) reported CONSORT items. Differences in reporting between pre and post-STRICTA studies were found for two CONSORT items (randomised sequence and treatment provider) but no STRICTA items. However, the results of cluster analysis and PCA detected global differences over time for both STRICTA and CONSORT items. CONCLUSION: Quality of reporting for studies of auriculotherapy for pain appears to have generally improved since the implementation of STRICTA and CONSORT guidelines.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Asher, GN; Motsinger-Reif, AA; Jonas, DE; Viera, AJ

Published Date

  • June 2011

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 29 / 2

Start / End Page

  • 122 - 126

PubMed ID

  • 21487067

Pubmed Central ID

  • 21487067

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 1759-9873

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1136/aim.2010.003475

Language

  • eng

Conference Location

  • England