Methodology and Reporting Quality Evaluation of Acupuncture for Mild Cognitive Impairment: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

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)	−1^①	0	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
	Acupuncture vs. donepezil	MQ (2)	−1^①	−1^③	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
Cao et al. (2013) [42]	Acupuncture combined with CFT/donepezil vs. CFT/donepezil	MMSE (6)	−1^①	−1^③	0	0	0	Low
		MoCA (1)	−1^①	−1^③	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
	Electroacupuncture combined with CFT vs. CFT	MBI (1)	−1^①	−1^③	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
	Electroacupuncture combined with nimodipine vs. nimodipine	MBI (1)	−1^①	−1^③	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
	Electroacupuncture vs. nimodipine	MBI (1)	−1^①	−1^③	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
Hu et al. (2014) [43]	Acupuncture vs. no acupuncture therapy	Effective rate (9)	−1^①	0	0	0	0	Moderate
	Acupuncture combined with nimodipine vs. nimodipine	MMSE (6)	−1^①	−1^③	0	0	0	Low
	Acupuncture combined with donepezil vs. donepezil	MMSE (2)	−1^①	0	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
Mai and Zheng (2015) [44]	Scalp electroacupuncture vs. nimodipine	Total effective rate (3)	−1^①	0	0	0	−1^⑤	Low
		Apparent efficiency (3)	−1^①	0	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
		MMSE (3)	−1^①	−1^③	0	0	−1^⑤	Very low
	Scalp acupuncture combined with CFT vs. CFT	Total effective rate (2)	−1^①	0	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
		Apparent efficiency (2)	−1^①	0	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
		MoCA (2)	−1^①	0	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
Deng and Wang (2016) [45]	Acupuncture vs. nimodipine	MMSE (3)	−1^①	0	0	0	−1^⑤	Low
		Clinical efficacy rate (3)	−1^①	0	0	0	−1^⑤	Low
	Acupuncture combined with nimodipine vs. nimodipine	MMSE (2)	−1^①	0	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
Ting et al. (2016) [46]	Acupuncture combined with Western medicine vs. Western medicine	MMSE (12)	−1^①	−1^③	0	0	0	Low
	Acupuncture combined with drug vs. drug	ADL (6)	−1^①	0	0	0	0	Moderate
Wang (2017) [47]	Acupuncture vs. ?	Effective rate (16)	−1^①	0	0	0	0	Moderate
	Acupuncture or acupuncture combined with other therapies vs. medicine	MMSE (7)	−1^①	0	0	0	0	Moderate
	Empirical acupuncture vs. ordinary acupuncture	MMSE (3)	−1^①	−1^③	0	0	−1^⑤	Very low
Li et al. 2018 [48]	Acupuncture vs. no acupuncture therapy	Total effective rate (2)	−1^①	0	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
		MMSE (9)	−1^①	−1^③	0	0	0	Low
		MoCA (5)	−1^①	−1^③	0	0	−1^②	Very low
		ADL (3)	−1^①	−1^③	0	0	−1^⑤	Very low
		CDT(2)	−1^①	−1^③	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	Very low
Kim et al. 2019 [49]	Electroacupuncture vs. antidementia drugs	MMSE (6)	−1^①	0	0	0	−1^②	Low
		MoCA (2)	−1^①	0	0	−1^④	−1^⑤	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.