Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Current meta-analyses have investigated the effectiveness of acupuncture for management of conventional therapy-induced side effects of cancer, however, the results were inconsistent. Little is known about the cumulative meta-analysis of acupuncture practice; it is important that the cumulative effect of the various proposals is kept under consideration.
Objective: To evaluate empirically the cumulative performance of acupuncture in meta-analysis on therapy-induced side effects of symptoms in cancer patients.
Methods: Databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycLIT, MANTIS, Science Citation Index, Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry, Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field Trials Register, Cochrane Pain, Palliative Care and Supportive Care Specialized Register, Cochrane Cancer Specialized Register and conference abstracts were consulted up to January 2015. We evaluated the quality of the included studies by AMSTAR criteria and analyzed the data using the Stata software, version 10.0. Data were provided by investigators; odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated on dichotomous data.
Results: Five meta-analyses have been published from 2006 to 2013, including a total of 5235 cancer participants and 5685 controls. The effect size and confidence intervals in pooled analysis failed in favor of acupuncture group compared with control therapies (acupuncture versus control groups, odds ratio (OR) = 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.87 to 1.33). Furthermore, the confidence intervals of treatment effectiveness of total population can be narrowed by accumulation in chronological order., the impact of sample size on the comprehensive results can be observed by accumulation according the sample size.
Conclusions: Cumulative meta-analysis methods can provide more information than the traditional meta-analysis methods. The shortage of meta-analysis may have caused a lack of statistical significance, which could be explained by the small sample size of the current study, acupuncture prescription, primary endpoint, the possibility of heterogeneity still exists, and the findings could not result in a reasonable recommendation.
Objective: To evaluate empirically the cumulative performance of acupuncture in meta-analysis on therapy-induced side effects of symptoms in cancer patients.
Methods: Databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycLIT, MANTIS, Science Citation Index, Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry, Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field Trials Register, Cochrane Pain, Palliative Care and Supportive Care Specialized Register, Cochrane Cancer Specialized Register and conference abstracts were consulted up to January 2015. We evaluated the quality of the included studies by AMSTAR criteria and analyzed the data using the Stata software, version 10.0. Data were provided by investigators; odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated on dichotomous data.
Results: Five meta-analyses have been published from 2006 to 2013, including a total of 5235 cancer participants and 5685 controls. The effect size and confidence intervals in pooled analysis failed in favor of acupuncture group compared with control therapies (acupuncture versus control groups, odds ratio (OR) = 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.87 to 1.33). Furthermore, the confidence intervals of treatment effectiveness of total population can be narrowed by accumulation in chronological order., the impact of sample size on the comprehensive results can be observed by accumulation according the sample size.
Conclusions: Cumulative meta-analysis methods can provide more information than the traditional meta-analysis methods. The shortage of meta-analysis may have caused a lack of statistical significance, which could be explained by the small sample size of the current study, acupuncture prescription, primary endpoint, the possibility of heterogeneity still exists, and the findings could not result in a reasonable recommendation.