How can meta-research be used to evaluate and improve the quality of research in the field of traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine?

The field of traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine (TCIM) has garnered increasing attention due to its holistic approach to health and well-being. While the quantity of published research about TCIM has increased exponentially, critics have argued that the field faces challenges related to methodological rigour, reproducibility, and overall quality. This article proposes meta-research as one approach to evaluating and improving the quality of TCIM research. Meta-research, also known as research about research, can be defined as "the study of research itself: its methods, reporting, reproducibility, evaluation, and incentives". By systematically evaluating methodological rigour, identifying biases, and promoting transparency, meta-research can enhance the reliability and credibility of TCIM research. Specific topics of interest that are discussed in this article include the following: 1) study design and research methodology, 2) reporting of research, 3) research ethics, integrity, and misconduct, 4) replicability and reproducibility, 5) peer review and journal editorial practices, 6) research funding: grants and awards, and 7) hiring, promotion, and tenure. For each topic, we provide case examples to illustrate meta-research applications in TCIM. We argue that meta-research initiatives can contribute to maintaining public trust, safeguarding research integrity, and advancing evidence based TCIM practice, while challenges include navigating methodological complexities, biases, and disparities in funding and academic recognition. Future directions involve tailored research methodologies, interdisciplinary collaboration, policy implications, and capacity building in meta-research.

The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials of HuatuoZaizao pill for stroke

Background: HuatuoZaizao pill (HZP), a Chinese patent medicine, is often used in the treatment of stroke. However, there is still a lack of enough evidence to recommend the routine use of HZP for stroke. This study is aimed at evaluating the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on HZP for stroke. Methods: RCTs on HuatuoZaizao pill for stroke were evaluated by using Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines and CONSORT extension criteria on reporting herbal interventions (CONSORT-CHM) guidelines. Microsoft Excel 2007 and SPSS20.0 was used for statistics analyses. Results: Seventeen studies involving 1801 stroke patients were identified. CONSORT-CHM has expanded 24.3% (9/37) items in CONSORT and added a small item. The average scores of CONSORT evaluation is 14.6, while the average scores of the CONSORT-CHM evaluation is 11.6. The central items in CONSORT as eligibility criterion, sample size calculation, primary outcome, method of randomization sequence generation, allocation concealment, implementation of randomization, description of blinding, and detailed statistical methods were reported in 77%, 6%, 100%, 47%, 6%, 6%, 6%, and 94% of trials, respectively. In terms of the CONSORT-CHM, none of the articles reported in detail the dosage form, origin, formula basis and so on of HZP, and only half of studies reported the outcome indicators related to Traditional Chinese Medicine syndromes. Conclusion: The overall report quality of RCT related to HZP is low. HZP still needs to report higher quality RCTs to prove its effectiveness and safety.