LAUSR

Objectives. We investigated the cognition and application of the “Evaluation System of Traditional Chinese Medicine Clinical Evidence” among populations with disparate backgrounds. Methods. We performed an online survey using a self-designed questionnaire. Results. Of 307 returned questionnaires, 284 were noted to be valid, and the effective recovery rate was 92.5%. Our analyses showed that the respondents demonstrated a better understanding of clinical evidence-based evaluation systems and that they used these occasionally. For both the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) and the traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) evidence evaluation systems, the respondents generally showed poor overall understanding, rendering the systems impractical. Among the respondents who were exposed to the existing evidence evaluation system for TCM. More than 70% of the respondents remarked that it was difficult to obtain high-quality evidence using any existing methods to evaluate TCM clinical evidence, that there was a lack of clear evaluation criteria, and that it was difficult to grasp the evaluation process. Conclusions. The evaluation systems of TCM clinical evidence have gained a certain degree of recognition among practitioners, who show a great willingness to use it, but practical applications are limited. In addition, it is also expected that an evaluation system would be more in line with the clinical characteristics of TCM.