Journal of Digital Convergence (디지털융복합연구)

The Society of Digital Policy and Management (한국디지털정책학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of Oriental Medicine in South Korea

AMSTAR를 활용한 국내 한의학 관련 체계적 문헌고찰 논문의 질 평가

  • Received : 2014.06.30
  • Accepted : 2015.10.20
  • Published : 2015.10.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aimed to find the problems of evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine and seek the future development direction by evaluating the quality of oriental medicine related systematic review(SR) studies using AMSTAR tool. The 26 SR studies related to oriental medicine were searched from the database of DBPIA, OASIS, and KISS, and they were evaluated on the basis of AMSTAR. The average of AMSTAR for the quality assessment of SR studies was 6.0 point, and the 26 studies included 2 high quality studies (7.7 %), 21 normal quality studies (80.8 %), and 3 low quality studies (11.5 %). The quality of studies was not correlated with the publication years. The quality of oriental medicine related SR studies need to be improved steadily. Furthermore, continued efforts to promote the evidence-based practice in the field of Oriental Medicine will help to establish foundation for the convergence approach in the healthcare sector.

이 연구는 국내 한의학 분야에서 발표된 체계적 문헌고찰 논문의 질을 AMSTAR 도구를 이용하여 평가해 봄으로써 최근 한의학계에서도 그 중요성이 강조되고 있는 근거중심대체의학(ECAM; Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine) 연구의 문제점을 확인하고 향후 발전 방향을 모색해 보고자 하였다. DBPIA, OASIS, KISS 데이터베이스를 통해 검색한 한의학 분야의 체계적 문헌고찰 논문(26편)을 두 명의 연구자가 AMSTAR 평가기준에 따라 평가하여 분석하였다. 국내 한의학 관련 체계적 문헌고찰 논문의 질 평가 결과 평균 6.0점이었으며, 전체 26편의 논문 중 높은 수준의 체계적 문헌고찰 논문은 2편(7.7%), 보통수준 21편(80.8%), 낮은 수준은 3편(11.5%)인 것으로 나타났다. 또한 체계적 문헌고찰 연구의 질 평가 점수는 출판연도와의 관련성이 없는 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 결과를 근거로 향후 한의학 분야의 체계적 문헌고찰 논문의 질적 수준이 꾸준히 개선되어야 할 것으로 사료된다. 나아가, 한의학분야의 근거기반실무를 활성화하기 위한 꾸준한 노력은 보건의료분야의 융복합적 접근을 위한 발판 마련에 도움이 될 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. C. M. Shin, C. S. Han, C. U. Pae, Patkar, A. A. Tools for quality evaluation of clinical research reports. Korean Journal of Psychopharmacology, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 67-72, 2011.
  2. Y. Y. Kim, J. H. Kwon, S. W. Lee, J. H. Yoo. Analysis on The status of prospective clinical researches related to Korean oriental medicine and their ethical aspects. Korean Journal of Oriental Physiology and Pathology, Vol. 26, No. 6, pp. 849-854, 2012.
  3. Erik von Elm, Douglas, G. A., Matthias, E., Stuart, J. P., Peter, C. G., Jan, P. V. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Preventive Medicine, Vol. 45, No. 4, pp. 247-251, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.08.012
  4. Begg, C., Cho, M., Eastwood, S., Horton, R., Robert, I. Size and quality of randomised controlled trials in head injury: review of published studies. BMJ, Vol. 320, pp. 1308-1311, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7245.1308
  5. S. K. Han, C. M. Shin, B. H. Jang, M. J. Kim, J. E. Park, H. H. Shon. Small study effect & publication bias when conducting systematic review with meta-analyses. National Evidence-based healthcare Collaborating Agency, pp. 1-175, 2012.
  6. Moher, D., Cook, D. J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., Stroup, D. F. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analysis. Lancet, Vol. 354, pp. 1896-1900, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04149-5
  7. Oxman, A. D., Guyatt, G. H., Singer, J., Goldsmith, C. H., Hutchison, B. G., Milner, R. A. et al. Agreement among reviewers of review articles. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 91-98, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(91)90205-N
  8. Stroup, D. F., Beerlin, J. A., Morton, S. C., Olkin, I., Williamson, G. D., Rennie, D. et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology; a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology(MOOSE) group. JAMA, Vol. 283, pp. 2008-2012, 2008.
  9. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis; The PRISMA statement. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Vol. 62, No. 10, pp. 1006-1012, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005
  10. Shea. B. J., Grimshaw, W. M., Wells, G. A., Boers, M., Andersson, N., Hamel, C. et al. Development of AMSTAR; A measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic review. BMC Medicl Research Methodology. 7:10 doi:10.1186/1471-2288-7-10, 2007.
  11. Shea, B. J., Hamel, C., Wells, G. A., Bouter, L. M., Kristjansson, E., Grimshaw, J., et al. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Vol. 62, No. 10, pp. 1013-2010, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.009
  12. Brown, S. J. Evidence-based nursing; The research practice connection(3rd ed.). Burlington, MA:Jones & Bartlett Learning. 2013.
  13. Kung, J., Chiappelli, F., Cajulis, O. O., Avezova, R., Kossan, G., Chew, L. et al. From systematic reviews to clinical recommendations for evidence-based health care: validation of revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews (R-AMSTAR) for grading of clinical relevance. The Open Dentistry Journal, Vol. 4, pp. 84-91, 2010.
  14. Y. I. Choi, E. Y. Park. A methodological quality assessment of meta-analyses of rehabilitation therapy areas in Korea. Asia-Pacific Journal of Multimedia Services Convergent with Art, Humanities, and Sociology, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 71-78, 2014. https://doi.org/10.14257/AJMAHS.2014.12.06
  15. J. H. Kim, A. K. Kim. A quality assessment of meta-analyses of nursing in South Korea. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing, Vol. 43, No. 6, pp. 736-745, 2013. https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2013.43.6.736
  16. Y. S. Song, M. H. Gang, S. A. Kim, I. S. Shin. Review of meta-analysis research on exercise in South Korea. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing, Vol. 44, No. 5, pp. 459-470, 2014. https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2014.44.5.459
  17. Matjasko J. L., Vivolo-Kantor, A. M., Massetti, G. M., Holland, K. M., Holt, M. K., Cruz, J. D. A. Systematic meta-review of evaluations of youth violence prevention programs: Common and divergent findings from 25 years of meta-analyses and systematic reviews. Aggression and Violent Behavior, Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 540-552. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2012.06.006
  18. Karl Pearson. Report on certain enteric fever inoculation statistics. British Medical Journal, Vol. 3, pp. 1243-1246, 1904.
  19. H. J. Kim, H. S. Ahn. Critical Appraisal of Systematic Review/Meta-analysis. The Korean Journal of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 73-79, 2015. https://doi.org/10.7704/kjhugr.2015.15.2.73
  20. S. S. Jeon. Effects of the Taeguk Gi Gong exercise on physical and physiological functions. Journal of Korean Acupuncture & Moxibustion Medicine Society, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 107-124, 2004.
  21. D. W. Shon, Y. M. Kwon, S. P. Ban, S, J. Kim. An effect of aromatic oil massage to EMG reaction after exercise. Journal of the Institute Oriental Medicine, Vol. 5, pp. 1-27, 2003.
  22. Jadad, A. R.,, Moore, R. A., Carroll, D., Jenkinson, C., Reynolds, D. J., Gavaghan, D. J., McQuay, H. J. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Controlled Clinical Trials, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 1-12, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4
  23. De Vito, C., Manzoli, L., Marzuillo, C., Anastasi, D., Boccia, A., Villari, P. A systematic review evaluating the potential for bias and the methodological quality of meta-analyses in vaccinology. Vaccine, Vol. 25, No. 52, pp. 794-806, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.09.051