Review Article

Effectiveness and Safety of Acupuncture for Migraine: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

Table 6

Evidence quality of included studies.

Author (date)Interventions vs comparisonsOutcomes (number of studies)Risk of biasInconsistencyIndirectionImprecisionPublication biasQuality of evidence

Gao (2011)Acupuncture vs sham acupunctureEffective rate at the end of treatment (8)000−10Moderate
Effective rate at the end of follow-up (4)0−10−10Low
Zheng (2012)Acupuncture vs western medicineEffective rate (8)0−1000Low
Acupuncture vs Chinese medicine therapyEffective rate (3)000−1−1Low
Acupuncture vs sham acupunctureEffective rate (3)000−1−1Low
Chen (2014)Acupuncture vs western medicineEffective rate (13)00000High
Yang (2014)Acupuncture vs western medicineShort-term effective rate (9)0−1000Low
Long-term effective rate (4)0−10—10Very low
Zhao (2014)Acupuncture vs Western medicineEffective rate (11)00000High
Dai (2014)Acupuncture vs western medicineEffective rate (2)0−10−1−1Very low
Pu (2016)Acupuncture vs western medicineEffective rate after 3–4 months follow-up (4)0−10−1−1Very low
Effective rate after 5–6 months follow-up (2)000−1−1Low
Song (2016)Acupuncture vs western medicineShort-term effective rate (15)00000High
Long-term effective rate (7)00000High
Long-term headache times (2)0−100−1Low
Xian (2016)Acupuncture vs sham acupunctureEffective rate at 1–2 months follow-up (5)000−10Moderate
Effective rate at 3–4 months follow-up (6)000−10Moderate
Effective rate at 5–6 months follow-up (5)0−10−10Low
Effective rate of more than 6 months follow-up (2)0−100−1Low
Acupuncture vs western medicineEffective rate at 1–2 months follow-up (4)0−100−1Low
Effective rate at 3–4 months follow-up (2)0−100−1Very low
Effective rate at 5–6 months follow-up (5)0−10−1−1Very low
Effective rate of 0–1 months follow-up (2)0−10−1−1Very low
Zhao (2016)Acupuncture vs western medicineEffective rate (8)0−1000Moderate
Xu (2018)Acupuncture vs western medicineEffective rate (6)000−10Moderate

The optimal information size was not enough. I2 value of the combined results was large, and/or confidence intervals overlapped difference. Suspicion of publishing bias.