Interpretation of the Guideline for Multi-dimensional and Multi-criteria Comprehensive Evaluation of Chinese Patent Medicine：weighting of evaluation indicators / 中国药房

OBJECTIVE To provide a detailed report and interpretation of the method and results for determining the weights of the technical indicators from the “multi-dimensional and multi-criteria comprehensive evaluation index system （first edition）” stated in Guideline for Multi-dimensional and Multi-criteria Comprehensive Evaluation of Chinese Patent Medicine. METHODS Normalization calculations were performed on the comprehensive weight values calculated by the analytic hierarchy process and expert weighting method to obtain the objective weights of the indicators. RESULTS The weight results of the six primary dimensions in the current comprehensive evaluation indicator system of Chinese patent medicine showed effectiveness dimension＞ safety dimension＞standard dimension＞application dimension＞scientific dimension＞economic dimension， with weight values of 0.281 0， 0.268 5， 0.195 8， 0.107 3， 0.096 1 and 0.051 3 respectively， consistent with the results of most researches currently. CONCLUSIONS The process of weight determination in this indicator system is scientifically reasonable， with clear methods and clear interpretations， and is worthy of further optimization and widespread application.

Methodology for the Development of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Chinese Patent Medicine： 2.Establishment of Guideline Working Group and Management of Conflict of Interests / 中医杂志

This paper summarized the key points and methods in terms of the establishment of the guideline working group and the management of conflict of interests， trying to provide reference for the development of clinical practice guidelines for Chinese patent medicine （CPM）. The establishment of the working group is the first important step for developing CPM guidelines. Considering the characteristics of the clinical practice guidelines for CPM， this study suggests that the three key elements of ‘multidisciplinarity’， ‘clinical relevance’ and ‘geographical representativeness’ should be put focus on when forming the working group. The guideline advisory committee， clinical expert group， evidence systematic evaluation group， secretary group and the external review group should be established. All group members should clarify the conflict of interest， and the process and management method of the conflict of interest should be clearly reported.