Table 6.
Sensitivity analysis results.
| Presensitivity analysis statistical method |
Heterogeneity | Sensitivity analysis | Number of trials (patient N) |
Postsensitivity analysis statistical method |
Heterogeneity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Effects of interventions, all body modalities versus standard treatment control (VAS) | |||||
| Random, −1.08 (−1.54, −0.61) |
P < 0.00001; I 2 = 90% |
Remove Kim et al. 2009 [23] and Sertel et al. 2009 [56] | 12 (755) | Random, −0.74 (−1.05, −0.43) |
P < 0.00001; I 2 = 76% |
|
| |||||
| Effects of invasive body electroacupuncture versus all controls (VAS) | |||||
| Random, −0.67 (−1.11, −0.24) |
P < 0.00001; I 2 = 83% |
Remove Gilbertson et al. 2003 [41] | 9 (505) | Random, −0.47 (−0.79, −0.15) |
P = 0.002; I 2 = 68% |
|
| |||||
| Effects of body electroacupuncture versus standard treatment (VAS) | |||||
| Random, −0.68 (−1.04, −0.32) |
P < 0.00001; I 2 = 78% |
Remove Deng et al. 2010 [35] and Chen et al. 2012 [32] | 8 (461) | Fixed, −0.38 (−0.57, −0.20) |
P = 0.33; I 2 = 13% |
|
| |||||
| Effects of body electroacupuncture versus sham/placebo control (VAS) | |||||
| Random, −0.67 (−1.13, −0.22) |
P < 0.00001; I 2 = 80% |
Remove Gilbertson et al. 2003 [41] | 8 (377) | Fixed, −0.42 (−0.62, −0.21) |
P = 0.08; I 2 = 44% |
|
| |||||
| Effects of body acupressure versus standard treatment (VAS) | |||||
| Random, −1.44 (−2.56, −0.33) |
P < 0.00001; I 2 = 92% |
Remove Adib-Hajbaghery and Etri 2013 [51] | 2 (144) | Fixed, −1.93 (−2.33, −1.53) |
P = 0.75; I 2 = 0% |
|
| |||||
| Overall effects of auricular interventions, all modalities versus sham/placebo control (VAS) | |||||
| Random, −0.56 (−1.05, −0.07) |
P < 0.00001; I 2 = 87% |
Remove Zhang 2013 [62] and Sator-Katzenschlager et al. 2006 [69] | 7 (409) | Random, −0.23 (−0.54, 0.09) |
P = 0.04; I 2 = 55% |
|
| |||||
| Effects of auricular manual acupuncture versus sham/placebo control (VAS) | |||||
| Random, −0.16 (−0.62, 0.30) |
P = 0.04; I 2 = 64% |
Remove Usichenko et al. 2007 [68] | 3 (132) | Fixed, −0.34 (−0.69, 0.00) |
P = 0.25; I 2 = 27% |
|
| |||||
| Overall effects of integrative interventions versus all controls (VAS and NRS) | |||||
| Random, −0.61 (−1.14, −0.07) |
P < 0.0001; I 2 = 84% |
Remove Tavares et al. 2007 [77] | 5 (420) | Fixed, −0.29 (−0.49, −0.09) |
P = 0.12; I 2 = 46% |