OBJECTIVE: This cross-sectional study assessed the methodological quality of systematic reviews (SRs) of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) published in Chinese between Jan 2021 and Sep 2022. METHODS: Chinese language CHM SRs were identified through literature searches across 3 international and 4 Chinese databases. Methodological quality was appraised using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2. Logistic regressions were used to explore associations between bibliographical characteristics and quality. RESULTS: Analyses of methodological quality found that among the 213 sampled SRs, 69.5% were of critically low quality, 30.5% were of low quality, and none achieved high or moderate quality. Common shortcomings included the failure to identify the studies excluded from the analysis, failure to disclose funding sources, and limited evaluation of the potential impact of bias on conclusions. Logistic regressions revealed that SRs led by corresponding authors affiliated with universities or academic institutions tended to be of lower quality than SRs led by authors affiliated with hospitals or clinical facilities. CONCLUSION Recent Chinese language CHM SRs exhibited limited methodological quality, making them unlikely to support the development of clinical practice guidelines. Urgent initiatives are needed to enhance training for researchers, peer-reviewers and editors involved in the preparation and publication of SRs. Adoption of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines in Chinese language journals is crucial to improve the relevance of SRs for Chinese medicine development. Addressing deficiencies in methodology and reporting is essential for promoting evidence-based practices and informed clinical decisions in Chinese medicine. Please cite this article as: Jiang Y, Zhong CC, Wang BH, Xu SS, Ho FF, Kwong MH, Ho L, Zhou JHS, Lam KC, Liu JP, Zhang BT, Chung VCH. Methodological quality of systematic reviews on orally administered Chinese herbal medicine published in Chinese between 2021 and 2022: A cross-sectional study. J Integr Med. 2025; 23(5):492-501.
Cross-Sectional Studies ; Drugs, Chinese Herbal/administration & dosage* ; Systematic Reviews as Topic/standards* ; Humans ; China ; Administration, Oral ; Medicine, Chinese Traditional

Progranulin (PGRN) is a growth factor implicated in various pathophysiological processes, including wound healing, inflammation, tumorigenesis, and neurodegeneration. It was previously reported that PGRN binds to tumor necrosis factor receptors (TNFR) and has therapeutic effects in inflammatory arthritis (Tang et. al, in Science 332:478-484, 2011); however, Chen et al. reported their inability to demonstrate the PGRN-TNFR interactions under their own conditions (Chen et. al, in J Neurosci 33:9202-9213, 2013). A letter-to-editor was then published by the original group in response to the Chen et al. paper that discussed the reasons for the latter's inability to recapitulate the interactions. In addition, the group published follow-up studies that further reinforced and dissected the interactions of PGRN-TNFR. Recently, the dispute about the legitimacy of PGRN-TNFR interactions appears to be finally settled with independent confirmations of these interactions in various conditions by numerous laboratories. This review presents a chronological update on the story of PGRN-TNFR interactions, highlighting the independent confirmations of these interactions in various diseases and conditions.
Animals ; Humans ; Intercellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins ; metabolism ; Progranulins ; Receptors, Tumor Necrosis Factor ; metabolism ; Signal Transduction ; physiology ; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha ; metabolism