The reporting quality and risk of bias of randomized controlled trials of acupuncture for migraine: Methodological study based on STRICTA and RoB 2.0.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the reporting quality and risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture for migraine, to facilitate and improve the quality of RCTs of acupuncture for migraine.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed and EMBASE were searched from inception to June 11, 2019 using a comprehensive search strategy. The reporting quality and risk of bias of included RCTs were independently evaluated by two investigators using STRICTA and RoB 2.0. Any disagreement was resolved by a third investigator.

RESULTS

A total of 28 eligible RCTs were published in 24 academic journals from 1994 to 2018. Based on STRICTA, four sub-items including "details of other interventions'' (1/28, 4 %), "setting and context of treatment" (9/28, 32 %), "the extent to which treatment was varied" (11/28, 39 %), and "number of needle insertions per subject per session" (13/28, 46 %), showed low reporting quality. A total of 32 different outcomes were reported in 28 RCTs, and based on RoB 2.0, nine (9/28, 32 %) RCTs were judged to be high RoB, three of which were owing to deviations from intended interventions; 11(11/28, 39 %) RCTs elicited some concerns; and eight (8/28, 29 %) RCTs were low RoB for their outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The reporting quality and risk of bias of RCTs of acupuncture for migraine remain suboptimal. Therefore, all stakeholders should make a contribution to improve the quality of RCTs of acupuncture for migraine using STRICTA and RoB 2.0, while not limiting this approach solely to studies on migraine, using STRICTA and RoB 2.0 tools.