Characteristics of registered systematic reviews on traditional Chinese medicine for COVID-19

Abstract Background: Characteristics of registered systematic reviews (SRs) on traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain unclear. This study aimed to analyze research collaboration, interventions, and outcomes in registered SRs of TCM associated with COVID-19.Methods: PROSPERO was searched to obtain SRs of TCM related to COVID-19 up to July 1, 2020. VOSviewer 1.6.14 software was used to generate network maps for countries, institutions, and provinces.Results: A total of 80 SRs were included, which were registered by 81 institutions from 6 countries. China (76, 95.00%) was the country with the highest output. 21 provinces in China contributed to the registration of SRs, Sichuan (25, 30.12%), Beijing (13, 15.66%), and Shaanxi (7, 8.43%) were the top three productive provinces. The top three productive institutions were Chengdu University of traditional Chinese medicine (18, 24.66%), Shaanxi University of traditional Chinese medicine (7, 9.59%), and Beijing University of traditional Chinese medicine (6, 8.22%). Collaborations among countries, provinces, and institutions were sparse. Interventions investigated included traditional Chinese medicine, integrated Chinese and Western medicine, acupuncture, and Taijiquan, but the description was brief, and no specific implementation plan was provided. The most frequently used primary outcome was clinical efficiency (45, 56.25%), and the most frequently used secondary outcome was the adverse event (50, 62.5%). The expression of the outcomes was not standardized.Conclusions: Although there were some collaborations between provinces and institutions, cooperation between countries should be further strengthened. The identified deficiencies in interventions and outcomes should be given more attention by future researchers.