MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281649336 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056803

Evidence mapping and overview of systematic reviews of the effects of acupuncture therapies

2022· review· en· W4281649336 on OpenAlex
Liming Lu, Yuqing Zhang, Shuqi Ge, Hao Wen, Xiaorong Tang, Jing chun Zeng, Lai Wang, Zeng Zhao, Gabriel Rada, Camila Ávila, Camilo Vergara, Rouhao Chen, Yu Dong, Xiaojing Wei, Wen Luo, Lin Wang, Gordon Guyatt, Chunzhi Tang, Nenggui Xu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcupuncture Treatment Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersGuangzhou UniversityGuangzhou University of Chinese MedicineNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineAcupunctureMEDLINESystematic reviewRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisAlternative medicineEvidence-based medicineClinical trialIntensive care medicinePhysical therapySurgeryInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To provide a route map regarding systematic reviews (SRs) of acupuncture therapies that will meet two goals: (1) to identify areas in which more or better evidence is required and (2) to identify acupuncture applications that, although proven effective, remain underused in practice, and thus warrant more effective knowledge dissemination. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included SRs that conducted meta-analyses (MAs) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for this overview. INFORMATION SOURCES: We searched for SRs without language restrictions from January 2015 to November 2020 in four Chinese electronic databases and Epistemonikos database. And we also searched for newly published RCTs that were eligible for selected best SRs in PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase and four Chinese electronic databases from its lasted search dates to November 2020. SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: We reanalysed the selected MAs if new primary studies were added. We used random-effect model to calculate the overall effect. RESULTS: Our search identified 120 SRs published in the last 5 years addressing acupuncture therapies across 12 therapeutic areas and 77 diseases and conditions. The SRs included 205 outcomes and involved 138 995 participants from 1402 RCTs. We constructed 77 evidence matrices, including 120 SRs and their included RCTs in the Epistemonikos database. Seventy-seven SRs represented the effect estimate of acupuncture therapies. Finally, we system summarised the areas of possible underutilisation of acupuncture therapies (high or moderate certainty evidence of large or moderate effects), and the areas of warranting additional investigation of acupuncture therapies (low or very low certainty evidence of moderate or large effects). CONCLUSION: The evidence maps and overview of SRs on acupuncture therapies identified both therapies with substantial benefits that may require more assertive evidence dissemination and promising acupuncture therapies that require further investigation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.267
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.560
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.017 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it