Objective To analyze the methodology and reporting quality of acupuncture related randomized controlled trials(RCTs)in order to provide a basis for improving the design and reporting of acupuncture studies.Methods Literatures on RCTs included in acupuncture were obtained from two systematic reviews of acupuncture studies.Two reviewers were selected independently according to the exclusion criteria,and RoB2.0,CONSORT statement and STRICTA criteria were used to evaluate the methodology and report quality.Results 95 literatures on acupuncture RCTs were included,including 51 in Chinese and 44 in English,involving 38 diseases and 54 outcome indicators.CONSORT declared that there were 8 items with high reporting rate,15 items with low reporting rate and 2 items with medium reporting rate in the evaluation.The STRICTA criteria included 8 items with high reporting rate,4 items with low reporting rate,and 4 items with medium reporting rate.As for RoB2.0 bias risk assessment,11.6%of the literature in the overall bias area that served as a summary was high risk,50.5%was likely risk,and 37.9%was low risk.Conclusion The current published RCTs research methodology and report quality evaluation are not high,the future research should improve the scientific and rigorous program design,to form a transparent and complete research report.

Objective To analyze the methodology and reporting quality of acupuncture related randomized controlled trials(RCTs)in order to provide a basis for improving the design and reporting of acupuncture studies.Methods Literatures on RCTs included in acupuncture were obtained from two systematic reviews of acupuncture studies.Two reviewers were selected independently according to the exclusion criteria,and RoB2.0,CONSORT statement and STRICTA criteria were used to evaluate the methodology and report quality.Results 95 literatures on acupuncture RCTs were included,including 51 in Chinese and 44 in English,involving 38 diseases and 54 outcome indicators.CONSORT declared that there were 8 items with high reporting rate,15 items with low reporting rate and 2 items with medium reporting rate in the evaluation.The STRICTA criteria included 8 items with high reporting rate,4 items with low reporting rate,and 4 items with medium reporting rate.As for RoB2.0 bias risk assessment,11.6%of the literature in the overall bias area that served as a summary was high risk,50.5%was likely risk,and 37.9%was low risk.Conclusion The current published RCTs research methodology and report quality evaluation are not high,the future research should improve the scientific and rigorous program design,to form a transparent and complete research report.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.apsb.2021.12.005.].

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is one of the most common human cancers; however, its outcome of pharmacotherapy is always very limited. Herein, we performed a batch query in the connectivity map (cMap) based on bioinformatics, queried out 35 compounds with therapeutic potential, and screened out parbendazole as a most promising compound, which had an excellent inhibitory effect on the proliferation of HNSCC cell lines. In addition, tubulin was identified as a primary target of parbendazole, and the direct binding between them was further verified. Parbendazole was further proved as an effective tubulin polymerization inhibitor, which can block the cell cycle, cause apoptosis and prevent cell migration, and it exhibited reasonable therapeutic effect and low toxicity in the in vivo and in vitro anti-tumor evaluation. Our study repositioned an anthelmintic parbendazole to treat HNSCC, which revealed a therapeutic utility and provided a new treatment option for human cancers.