Objective To evaluate the risk of bias and reporting quality in randomized controlled trials(RCTs)of the Chinese medicine injection for acute cerebral infarction in the last five years.Methods RCTs literature on Chinese medicine injection in the treatment of acute cerebral infarction was systematically searched in CNKI,Wanfang Data,VIP,China Biology Medicine Database(CBM),PubMed,Embase and Cochrane Library from April 20,2018 to April 20,2023.The risk of bias and reporting quality of included RCTs were evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool(ROB 1.0)and CONSORT-CHM Formulas 2017,respectively.Results A total of 4 301 articles were retrieved,and 408 RCTs were included according to inclusion and exclusion criteria.The ROB evaluation results showed that the the majority of studies were rated as having an unclear risk of bias due to the lack of reporting on allocation concealment,blind method,trial registration information,and funding sources.The evaluation results of CONSORT-CHM Formulas 2017 showed that the number of reported papers of 17 items was greater than or equal to 50%,and the number of reported papers of 25 items was less than 10%,and most of the RCTs did not show the characteristics of TCM syndrome differentiation and treatment.Conclusion The quality of Chinese medicine injection in the treatment of acute cerebral infarction RCTs is generally low.It is recommended that researchers refer to the methodology design of RCTs and international reporting standards,improve the trial design,standardize the trial report,and highlight the characteristics of TCM syndrome differentiation and treatment.

Standardized reporting is a crucial factor affecting the use of patient guidelines （PGs）， particularly in the reporting and presentation of recommendations. This paper introduced the current status of PG reporting， including the research on PG content and presentation formats， and provided comprehensive recommendations for PG reporting from aspects such as overall framework， recommendations， presentation format， and readability. First， the presentation of PG recommendations should include clearly defined clinical questions， recommendations and their rationale， and guidance on how patients should implement the interventions； for specific content in the PG， such as level of evidence， level of recommendation， it is recommended to explain in text the reasons for giving different levels of recommendation， i.e.， to present the logic behind giving the level of recommendation to the patient； additional information needed in the recommendation framework should be supplemented by tracing references or authoritative textbooks and literature that support the recommendations. Subsequently， the PG text should be written based on the Reporting Checklist for Public Versions of Guidelines （RIGHT-PVG） reporting framework. Finally， to enhance readability and comprehension， it is recommended to refer to the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool （PEMAT） for translating PG content. To enhance the readability of PGs， it is suggested to present the PG content in a persona-lized and layered manner.

Since the concept of patient versions of guidelines （PVGs） was introduced into China， several PVGs have been published in China， but we found that there is a big difference between the concept of PVG at home and abroad， and the reason for this difference has not been reasonably explained， which has led to ambiguity and even misapplication of the PVG concept by guideline developers. By analyzing the background and purpose of PVGs， and the understanding of the PVG concept by domestic scholars， we proposed the term patient guidelines （PGs）. This refers to guidelines developed under the principles of evidence-based medicine， centered on health issues that concern patients， and based on the best available evidence， intended for patient use. Except for the general attribute of providing information or education， which is typical of common health education materials， PGs also provide recommendations and assist in decision-making， so PGs include both the patient versions of guidelines （PVG） as defined by the Guidelines International Network （GIN） and "patient-directed guidelines"， i.e. clinical practice guidelines resulting from the adaptation or reformulation of recommendations through clinical practice guidelines.

At present， the process and methodology of patient guidelines （PGs） development varies greatly and lacks systematic and standardised guidance. In addition to the interviews with PG developers， we have sorted out the relevant methodology for the adaptation and development of existing clinical practice guideline recommendations and facilitated expert deliberations to achieve a consensus， so as to finally put forward a proposal for guidance on the process and methodology for the development of PGs. The development of PGs can be divided into the preparation stage， the construction stage， and the completion stage in general， but the specific steps vary according to the different modes of development of PGs. The development process of Model 1 is basically the same as the patient version of the guideline development process provided by the International Guidelines Network， i.e.， team formation， screening of recommendations， guideline drafing， user testing and feedback， approval and dissemination. The developer should also first determine the need for and scope of translating the clinical practice guideline into a patient version during the preparation phase. Model 2 adds user experience and feedback to the conventional clinical practice guideline development process （forming a team， determining the scope of the PG， searching， evaluating and integrating evidence， forming recommendations， writing the guideline， and expert review）. Based on the different models， we sort out the process and methods of PG development and introduce the specific methods of PG development， including how to identify the clinical problem and how to form recommendations based on the existing clinical practice guidelines， with a view to providing reference for guideline developers and related researchers.

To reduce the subjectivity and uncertainty present in the current international methods of drug value pricing when converting value into monetary prices,based on the hedonic pricing theory,it considers the post-negotiation price between manufacturers and payers as a reasonable price reference in the value pricing of Chinese patent medicine.By constructing an indicator system for the characteristics of Chinese patent medicine,it selects and measures the value characteristic variables that affect the price of Chinese patent medicine.It serves as the theoretical foundation and research basis for establishing a Hedonic price model between characteristic price variables and negotiation prices,thereby promoting the enhancement of rationality and objectivity in value-guided pricing of Chinese patent medicine.

Objective The purpose is to sort out the key steps and core indicators of priority setting for health technology assessment,and provide references for the research of priority setting for health technology assessment in China.Methods To search information from the official website of the World Health Organization,the websites of international health technology assessment agencies/organizations,and CNKI,Wanfang,Pubmed,Embase and other databases related for the setting of health technology assessment priority topics,and the key steps and core indicators of the setting of priority topics were analyzed by descriptive statistical analysis.Results 21 priority setting schemes for health technology assessment were finally incorporated,and the key steps were extracted to set indicators for collecting evaluations.Ratings and rankings and review decisions.The core indicators are disease burden,economic impact and clinical/health impact.Conclusion The key steps and core indicators of international priority setting provide rich practical experience for China's health technology assessment priority setting,which should be actively used for reference to promote evidence-based and scientific decision-making of health technology assessment in China.

To reduce the subjectivity and uncertainty present in the current international methods of drug value pricing when converting value into monetary prices,based on the hedonic pricing theory,it considers the post-negotiation price between manufacturers and payers as a reasonable price reference in the value pricing of Chinese patent medicine.By constructing an indicator system for the characteristics of Chinese patent medicine,it selects and measures the value characteristic variables that affect the price of Chinese patent medicine.It serves as the theoretical foundation and research basis for establishing a Hedonic price model between characteristic price variables and negotiation prices,thereby promoting the enhancement of rationality and objectivity in value-guided pricing of Chinese patent medicine.

Objective The purpose is to sort out the key steps and core indicators of priority setting for health technology assessment,and provide references for the research of priority setting for health technology assessment in China.Methods To search information from the official website of the World Health Organization,the websites of international health technology assessment agencies/organizations,and CNKI,Wanfang,Pubmed,Embase and other databases related for the setting of health technology assessment priority topics,and the key steps and core indicators of the setting of priority topics were analyzed by descriptive statistical analysis.Results 21 priority setting schemes for health technology assessment were finally incorporated,and the key steps were extracted to set indicators for collecting evaluations.Ratings and rankings and review decisions.The core indicators are disease burden,economic impact and clinical/health impact.Conclusion The key steps and core indicators of international priority setting provide rich practical experience for China's health technology assessment priority setting,which should be actively used for reference to promote evidence-based and scientific decision-making of health technology assessment in China.

To reduce the subjectivity and uncertainty present in the current international methods of drug value pricing when converting value into monetary prices,based on the hedonic pricing theory,it considers the post-negotiation price between manufacturers and payers as a reasonable price reference in the value pricing of Chinese patent medicine.By constructing an indicator system for the characteristics of Chinese patent medicine,it selects and measures the value characteristic variables that affect the price of Chinese patent medicine.It serves as the theoretical foundation and research basis for establishing a Hedonic price model between characteristic price variables and negotiation prices,thereby promoting the enhancement of rationality and objectivity in value-guided pricing of Chinese patent medicine.

Objective The purpose is to sort out the key steps and core indicators of priority setting for health technology assessment,and provide references for the research of priority setting for health technology assessment in China.Methods To search information from the official website of the World Health Organization,the websites of international health technology assessment agencies/organizations,and CNKI,Wanfang,Pubmed,Embase and other databases related for the setting of health technology assessment priority topics,and the key steps and core indicators of the setting of priority topics were analyzed by descriptive statistical analysis.Results 21 priority setting schemes for health technology assessment were finally incorporated,and the key steps were extracted to set indicators for collecting evaluations.Ratings and rankings and review decisions.The core indicators are disease burden,economic impact and clinical/health impact.Conclusion The key steps and core indicators of international priority setting provide rich practical experience for China's health technology assessment priority setting,which should be actively used for reference to promote evidence-based and scientific decision-making of health technology assessment in China.