Skip to main content
. 2020 Aug 5;2020:7908067. doi: 10.1155/2020/7908067

Table 17.

Quality of evidence in included systematic reviews with GRADE.

Authors (year) Intervention Outcomes Limitations Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Publication bias Quality of evidence
Mao (2011) [39] Acupuncture vs. donepezil MMSE (3) −1 0 0 −1 −1 Very low
Acupuncture vs. donepezil MQ (2) −1 −1 0 −1 −1 Very low
Cao et al. (2013) [42] Acupuncture combined with CFT/donepezil vs. CFT/donepezil MMSE (6) −1 −1 0 0 0 Low
MoCA (1) −1 −1 0 −1 −1 Very low
Electroacupuncture combined with CFT vs. CFT MBI (1) −1 −1 0 −1 −1 Very low
Electroacupuncture combined with nimodipine vs. nimodipine MBI (1) −1 −1 0 −1 −1 Very low
Electroacupuncture vs. nimodipine MBI (1) −1 −1 0 −1 −1 Very low
Hu et al. (2014) [43] Acupuncture vs. no acupuncture therapy Effective rate (9) −1 0 0 0 0 Moderate
Acupuncture combined with nimodipine vs. nimodipine MMSE (6) −1 −1 0 0 0 Low
Acupuncture combined with donepezil vs. donepezil MMSE (2) −1 0 0 −1 −1 Very low
Mai and Zheng (2015) [44] Scalp electroacupuncture vs. nimodipine Total effective rate (3) −1 0 0 0 −1 Low
Apparent efficiency (3) −1 0 0 −1 −1 Very low
MMSE (3) −1 −1 0 0 −1 Very low
Scalp acupuncture combined with CFT vs. CFT Total effective rate (2) −1 0 0 −1 −1 Very low
Apparent efficiency (2) −1 0 0 −1 −1 Very low
MoCA (2) −1 0 0 −1 −1 Very low
Deng and Wang (2016) [45] Acupuncture vs. nimodipine MMSE (3) −1 0 0 0 −1 Low
Clinical efficacy rate (3) −1 0 0 0 −1 Low
Acupuncture combined with nimodipine vs. nimodipine MMSE (2) −1 0 0 −1 −1 Very low
Ting et al. (2016) [46] Acupuncture combined with Western medicine vs. Western medicine MMSE (12) −1 −1 0 0 0 Low
Acupuncture combined with drug vs. drug ADL (6) −1 0 0 0 0 Moderate
Wang (2017) [47] Acupuncture vs. ? Effective rate (16) −1 0 0 0 0 Moderate
Acupuncture or acupuncture combined with other therapies vs. medicine MMSE (7) −1 0 0 0 0 Moderate
Empirical acupuncture vs. ordinary acupuncture MMSE (3) −1 −1 0 0 −1 Very low
Li et al. 2018 [48] Acupuncture vs. no acupuncture therapy Total effective rate (2) −1 0 0 −1 −1 Very low
MMSE (9) −1 −1 0 0 0 Low
MoCA (5) −1 −1 0 0 −1 Very low
ADL (3) −1 −1 0 0 −1 Very low
CDT(2) −1 −1 0 −1 −1 Very low
Kim et al. 2019 [49] Electroacupuncture vs. antidementia drugs MMSE (6) −1 0 0 0 −1 Low
MoCA (2) −1 0 0 −1 −1 Very low

① = the design of the experiment with a large bias in random, distributive hiding, or blind. ② = funnel graph asymmetry. ③ = the confidence interval overlaps less, the heterogeneity test P is very small, and I2 is larger. ④ = the sample size is small, and the confidence interval is wide. ⑤ = fewer studies are included, and there may be greater publication bias. ?The original text does not clearly mention what the control group is.