| Methods |
Design: three group parallel trial
Purpose: examine the effect of real and sham acupuncture on bronchial asthma |
| Participants |
Patients: out‐patients with chronic asthma
Baseline comparability: yes |
| Interventions |
Placebo: needling at 11 sites not regarded true acupuncture sites
Untreated: no needling
Experimental: needling at 11 sites 'believed to have an anti‐asthmatic effect'.
(Co‐intervention: standard pharmacological inhalation therapy) |
| Outcomes |
Proportion of patients scoring 1 to 4 on a VAS for nausea
Proportion of patients scoring 1 to 4 on a VAS for difficulty of swallowing gastroscopy
Proportion of patients scored 1 to 4 by gastrocopist on a VAS for nausea/retching
Proportion of patient who accept re‐gastroscopy |
| Notes |
|
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Adequate sequence generation? |
Unclear risk |
NS |
| Allocation concealment? |
Unclear risk |
NS |
| Blinding?
Treatment provider |
Unclear risk |
NS |
| Blinding?
Outcome assessor |
Unclear risk |
NS |
| Incomplete outcome data addressed?
All outcomes |
Low risk |
Drop‐out < 15% |
| Free of selective reporting? |
Unclear risk |
No protocol available |
| Free of other bias? |
Low risk |
|
| No signs of variance inequality or skewness? |
Unclear risk |
Not relevant (not naturally positive continuous outcomes e.g. change) |
| Trial size > 49? |
High risk |
N = 41 |
| Clearly concealed allocation + trial size > 49 + drop‐out max 15% |
High risk |
Trial size < 49 |
