Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 6, 2026

Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Shugan Jieyu Capsules for the Treatment of Insomnia
Published on: February 17, 2023
Methodological quality of systematic reviews on orally administered Chinese herbal medicine published in Chinese
Yue Jiang1, Claire Chenwen Zhong2, Betty Huan Wang2
1School of Chinese Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin 999077, Hong Kong, China.
Objective:
This cross-sectional study assessed the methodological quality of systematic reviews (SRs) of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) published in Chinese between Jan 2021 and Sep 2022.
Methods:
Chinese language CHM SRs were identified through literature searches across 3 international and 4 Chinese databases. Methodological quality was appraised using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2. Logistic regressions were used to explore associations between bibliographical characteristics and quality.
Results:
Analyses of methodological quality found that among the 213 sampled SRs, 69.5% were of critically low quality, 30.5% were of low quality, and none achieved high or moderate quality. Common shortcomings included the failure to identify the studies excluded from the analysis, failure to disclose funding sources, and limited evaluation of the potential impact of bias on conclusions. Logistic regressions revealed that SRs led by corresponding authors affiliated with universities or academic institutions tended to be of lower quality than SRs led by authors affiliated with hospitals or clinical facilities.
Conclusion:
Recent Chinese language CHM SRs exhibited limited methodological quality, making them unlikely to support the development of clinical practice guidelines. Urgent initiatives are needed to enhance training for researchers, peer-reviewers and editors involved in the preparation and publication of SRs. Adoption of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines in Chinese language journals is crucial to improve the relevance of SRs for Chinese medicine development. Addressing deficiencies in methodology and reporting is essential for promoting evidence-based practices and informed clinical decisions in Chinese medicine. Please cite this article as: Jiang Y, Zhong CC, Wang BH, Xu SS, Ho FF, Kwong MH, Ho L, Zhou JHS, Lam KC, Liu JP, Zhang BT, Chung VCH. Methodological quality of systematic reviews on orally administered Chinese herbal medicine published in Chinese between 2021 and 2022: A cross-sectional study. J Integr Med. 2025; 23(5):492-501.
More Related Videos
05:59An In Vitro Dissolution Determination of Multi-Index Components in Tibetan Medicine Rhodiola Granules
Published on: November 4, 2022
09:16Author Spotlight: Optimization of Processing Technology for Tiebangchui with Zanba Based on CRITIC Combined with Box-Behnken Response Surface Method
Published on: May 12, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Measurement of Bioavailability: Pharmacodynamic Methods
Bioequivalence Data: Statistical Interpretation
Drug Dissolution: Requirements and Profile Comparison
Drug Product Performance: In Vitro–In Vivo Correlation
Clinically Relevant Drug Product Specifications: Methods of Establishment
Bioequivalence of Drugs: Drugs with Multiple Indications