Table 5.
Results of GRADE assessment.
| Author(s), year | Outcomes | Studies (participants) | Limitations | Inconsistency | Indirectness | Imprecision | Publication bias | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gong et al. (16) | Response | |||||||
| AT vs. MT | 1(60) | −1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | VL | |
| AT vs. WAT | 1(62) | −1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | VL | |
| AT vs. EAT | 1(128) | −1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | L | |
| BAT vs. AAT | 1(147) | −1 | −1 | 0 | −1 | 0 | VL | |
| AT+MT vs. MT | 2(140) | −1 | −1 | 0 | −1 | 0 | VL | |
| AT vs. EAT+MT | 1(68) | −1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | VL | |
| Zhang et al. (17) | Response | |||||||
| AT vs. MT | 10(633) | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | L | |
| THI | ||||||||
| AT vs. MT | 3(173) | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | L | |
| AT vs. SAT | 2(90) | −1 | −1 | 0 | −1 | 0 | VL | |
| Song et al. (18) | Response | |||||||
| AT vs. MT | 9(1174) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | M | |
| Ji et al. (19) | Response | |||||||
| AT vs. MT | 7(678) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | L | |
| AT+MT vs. MT | 4(511) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | L | |
| EAT+AI vs. MT | 2(132) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | L | |
| MT+AP vs. MT | 2(196) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | L | |
| Meng et al. (20) | Response | |||||||
| AT vs. MT | 8(851) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | M | |
| OAT vs. CAT | 10(774) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | M | |
| AT+MT vs. MT | 4(324) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | M | |
| AT+MT vs. AT | 4(184) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | M | |
| Nie et al. (21) | Response | |||||||
| AT vs. MT | 3(250) | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | −1 | VL | |
| AT+MT vs. MT | 2(200) | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | −1 | VL | |
| AT+CPM vs. MT | 1(73) | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | −1 | VL | |
| Ma et al. (22) | Response | |||||||
| AT vs. MT | 7(496) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | L | |
| AT+CPM vs. MT | 4(324) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | L | |
| AT vs. SAT | 4(244) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | M | |
| Fang et al. (23) | Response | |||||||
| EAT vs. AT | 6(443) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | L | |
| EAT+CPM vs. MT | 8(759) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | L | |
| EAT vs. CT | 14(1202) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | L | |
| Xie et al. (24) | Response | |||||||
| AT vs. MT | 5(358) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | M | |
| AT vs. CM | 2(122) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | M | |
| AT+MT vs. MT | 2(155) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | M | |
| AT+CM vs. CM | 3(334) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | M | |
| Liu et al. (25) | Response | |||||||
| AT vs. SAT | 2(66) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | M | |
| AT vs. MT | 3(190) | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | −1 | L | |
| AT+CT vs. CT | 1(64) | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | −1 | L | |
| EAT vs. MT | 3(240) | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | −1 | L | |
| AT+MT vs. AT | 1(54) | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | −1 | L | |
| AT+MT vs. MT | 1(100) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | M | |
| He et al. (26) | Response | |||||||
| EAT vs. AT | 1(128) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | L | |
| EAT vs. PAT | 2(64) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | M | |
| EAT+CPM+PT vs. CPM+PT | 1(60) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | L | |
| EAT+CPM vs. MT | 1(60) | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | M | |
| Huang et al. (27) | VAS | |||||||
| AT vs. SAT | 4(263) | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | M | |
| AT vs. MT | 1(64) | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | L | |
| WAT vs. MT | 2(117) | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | L | |
| THI | ||||||||
| AT vs. SAT | 1(57) | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | M | |
| WAT vs. MT | 2(117) | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | L | |
| AT vs. MT | 1(64) | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | L | |
| AT vs. CT | 1(70) | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | L | |
| TSI | ||||||||
| AT vs. SAT | 2(142) | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | L | |
| Kim et al. (28) | Response | |||||||
| AT vs. SAT | 7(293) | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | M | |
| AT vs. MT | 2(150) | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | L | |
| Park et al. (29) | Response | |||||||
| AT vs. SAT | 2(75) | −1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | VL | |
| VAS | ||||||||
| AT vs. SAT | 3(88) | −1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | VL | |
| TA vs. CT | 1(22) | −1 | −1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | VL |
VS, versus; AT, acupuncture; MT, medication therapy; WAT, warm acupuncture; EAT, electroacupuncture; BAT, body acupuncture; AAT, abdominal acupuncture; AI, acupoint injection; AP, acupoint application; CPM, Chinese patent medicine; SAT, sham acupuncture; OAT, other acupuncture; CAT, conventional acupuncture; CT, conventional therapy; PAT, placebo acupuncture; PT, Psychotherapy; VAS, visual analog scale; THI, tinnitus handicap inventory; TIS, tinnitus severity index; VL, very low; L, low; M, moderate.