Acupuncture and safety for post-stroke hiccups: An overview of systematic reviews

Published: 6 November 2023| Version 1 | DOI: 10.17632/94yxp7cfhg.1
Xiaozhu Haung


Methods: Four international electronic databases (Cochrane database, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science) and four Chinese electronic databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang database, SinoMed database and VIP database) were searched from their creation to February 4, 2023. Search terms such as “Acupuncture”, “Hiccup”, “Stroke” and “Meta analysis” were used. Data extraction and analysis: The risk of bias, quality of reporting and evidence for SRs were assessed by the risk of bias in systematic reviews (ROBIS) tool, the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA 2020), and the quality of evidence for outcome measures by recommending grading, assessment, development and Evaluation (GRADE) for assessment. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and analysis, and the degree of agreement was scored using the κ index. Results: Seven SRs met the inclusion criteria. In PRISMA 2020 reporting quality assessment, there were missing key reporting items and incomplete reporting of other items in the topics of structured abstracts, protocols and registrations, search strategies, risk of bias, data extraction, analysis templates and codes, and conflicts of interest. All SRs were rated as high risk of bias based on the ROBIS tool. According to the GRADE system, the results were all rated as low-quality evidence. Limitations of the original trial and publication bias topped the list of downgrading factors, followed by inconsistency and imprecision.