Skip Navigation



eCAM Advance Access published online on November 24, 2006
eCAM, doi:10.1093/ecam/nel095
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrowOA All Versions of this Article:
4/2/267    most recent
nel095v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by White, P.
Right arrow Articles by Seung-Hoon, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by White, P.
Right arrow Articles by Seung-Hoon, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2006 The Author(s).
Received July 13, 2006
Accepted October 18, 2006

Meeting Report

Standardization of Nomenclature in Acupuncture Research (SoNAR)

Peter White 1 *, Brenda Golianu 2, Chris Zaslawski 3, and Choi Seung-Hoon 4

1 University of Southampton, UK
2 Stanford University, USA
3 University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
4 Regional Adviser in Traditional Medicine, World Health Organization, Western Pacific Regional Office, Philippines

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Peter White, E-mail: pjw1{at}soton.ac.uk


  Abstract

As more clinical acupuncture trials for pain are published, it becomes increasingly difficult to compare and evaluate the merits and shortcomings of such studies. A major contributory factor to this centers on the description of, and the assumptions made about, the control intervention used. In considering an acupuncture control, it is important to evaluate its physiological activity and thus far, this has not been done. A variety of different and sometimes very novel controls have been tried and used in the research setting and the inevitable consequence of this is confusion, particularly when attempting to interpret the results of trials. Researchers and other interested parties such as patients, primary care practitioners, funding agencies etc., searching for evidence in the literature are likely to be misled or confused by such variability. There is therefore a need to define and standardize many of these terms, to clarify reporting and to convey the correct information in a way that it is not misleading. This paper details the background and need for this and is primarily intended to assist those who intend to publish primary and secondary acupuncture research. However, standardization of reporting will be of benefit to anybody who will need to examine the literature for evidence. This article proposes and recommends a nomenclature when reporting future acupuncture clinical research. This nomenclature arose through discussion at a meeting convened by the World Health Organisation (Western Pacific Regional Office) and will be incorporated into their policy document later this year.

Keywords: acupuncture; nomenclature; reporting; RCT; standardization.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.