Table 3 The reporting number and percentage for each item of the STRICTA checklist of the included 70 studies
From: The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials of electroacupuncture for stroke
Item | Detail | Total N = 70 | Chinese N = 54 | English N = 16 | Chinese vs. English (P-value for difference) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | %(n /70) | 95% CI | n | %(n /54) | 95% CI | n | %(n /16) | 95% CI | |||
1. Acupuncturerationale (Explanations and examples) | 1a) Style of acupuncture (e.g. Traditional Chinese Medicine, Japanese, Korean, Western medical, Five Element, ear acupuncture, etc.) | 64 | 91 | [82 to 97] | 50 | 93 | [82 to 98] | 14 | 88 | [62 to 98] | 0.530 |
1b) Reasoning for treatment provided, based on historical context, literature sources, and/or consensus methods, with references where appropriate | 60 | 86 | [75 to 93] | 50 | 93 | [82 to 98] | 10 | 63 | [35 to 85] | 0.033 | |
1c) Extent to which treatment was varied | 0 | 0 | [0 to 5] | 0 | 0 | [0 to 7] | 0 | 0 | [0 to 21] | _ | |
2. Details of needling (Explanations and examples) | 2a) Number of needle insertions per subject per session (mean and range where relevant) | 25 | 36 | [25 to 48] | 18 | 33 | [21 to 47] | 7 | 44 | [20 to 70] | 0.452 |
2b) Names (or location if no standard name) of points used (uni/bilateral) | 68 | 97 | [9 to 10] | 52 | 96 | [87 to 100] | 16 | 100 | [79 to 100] | 0.442 | |
2c) Depth of insertion, based on a specified unit of measurement, or on a particular tissue level | 20 | 29 | [18 to 41] | 18 | 33 | [21 to 47] | 2 | 12 | [2 to 38] | 0.060 | |
2d) Response sought (e.g. de qi or muscle twitch response) | 46 | 66 | [53 to 77] | 39 | 72 | [58 to 84] | 7 | 44 | [20 to 70] | 0.035 | |
2e) Needle stimulation (e.g. manual, electrical) | 70 | 100 | [95 to 100] | 54 | 100 | [93 to 100] | 16 | 100 | [79 to 100] | _ | |
2f) Needle retention time | 40 | 57 | [45 to 69] | 32 | 59 | [45 to 72] | 8 | 50 | [25 to 75] | 0.518 | |
2g) Needle type (diameter, length, and manufacturer or material) | 46 | 66 | [53 to 77] | 38 | 70 | [56 to 82] | 8 | 50 | [25 to 75] | 0.222 | |
3. Treatmentregimen (Explanations and examples) | 3a) Number of treatment sessions | 48 | 69 | [56 to 79] | 38 | 70 | [56 to 82] | 10 | 63 | [35 to 85] | 0.558 |
3b) Frequency and duration of treatment sessions | 70 | 100 | [95 to 100] | 54 | 100 | [93 to 100] | 16 | 100 | [79 to 100] | _ | |
4. Othercomponents of treatment (Explanations and examples) | 4a) Details of other interventions administered to the acupuncture group (e.g. moxibustion, cupping, herbs, exercises, lifestyle advice) | 60 | 86 | [75 to 93] | 49 | 91 | [80 to 97] | 11 | 69 | [41 to 89] | 0.098 |
4b) Setting and context of treatment, including instructions to practitioners, and information and explanations to patients | 9 | 13 | [6 to 23] | 4 | 7 | [2 to 18] | 5 | 31 | [11 to 59] | 0.073 | |
5. Practitioner background (Explanations and examples) | 5) Description of participating acupuncturists (qualification or professional affiliation, years in acupuncture practice, other relevant experience) | 11 | 16 | [8 to 26] | 3 | 6 | [1 to 15] | 8 | 50 | [25 to 75] | 0.004 |
6. Control or comparator interventions (Explanations and examples) | 6a) Rationale for the control or comparator in the context of the research question, with sources that justify this choice | 7 | 10 | [4 to 20] | 4 | 7 | [2 to 18] | 3 | 19 | [4 to 46] | 0.302 |
6b) Precise description of the control or comparator. If sham acupuncture or any other type of acupuncture-like control is used, provide details as for Items 1 to 3 above. | 65 | 93 | [84 to 98] | 52 | 96 | [87 to 100] | 13 | 81 | [54 to 96] | 0.166 | |
Total mean scorea |  | 10.1 ± 1.9 | 10.3 ± 1.8 | 9.6 ± 2.1 | 0.235 | ||||||