A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Quality Assessment of Traditional Persian Medicine Observational Studies. | LitMetric

Quality Assessment of Traditional Persian Medicine Observational Studies.

Iran J Public Health

Department of Persian Medicine, Faculty of Traditional Medicine, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.

Published: July 2024

Background: Although observational studies are valuable sources of scientific evidence, they are prone to bias and confounding. This study aimed to assess the quality of observational studies in Traditional Persian medicine (TPM).

Methods: A systematic search was conducted in national and international databases up to the end of 2022 to identify observational studies on TPM. The quality of articles was evaluated using the STROBE checklist and CARE guidelines.

Results: Out of the 192 articles identified, 109 met the eligible criteria for quality assessment. Cross-sectional and case-control studies had a mean STROBE score of 1.2±0.51 out of 2, with the introduction section scoring highest and the results and methods sections scoring lowest. The worst reported items in the method section involved sensitivity analyses, bias control, and management of missing data. Case reports and case series had a mean score of 1.4±0.55 out of 2, with the section on therapeutic interventions scoring the highest. Other sections like keywords, follow-up and outcomes, diagnostic assessment, patient perspective, and informed consent scored below one.

Conclusion: Many reviewed articles did not adhere to the recommended formatting in the evaluation tools, making it challenging to assess their quality. Having said that, the quality of observational studies in the field of TPM is a point of concern.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11287588PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v53i7.16042DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

observational studies
20
quality assessment
8
traditional persian
8
persian medicine
8
assess quality
8
quality observational
8
scoring highest
8
quality
6
studies
6
observational
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!