[Ethical review of clinical study on intervention with traditional Chinese medicine in new public health emergencies].

High-quality clinical study on traditional Chinese medicine is of great significance to effectively control new public health emergencies represented by outbreaks of infectious diseases and ensure people's health and safety, but it still faces a series of ethical issues. Based on the seven core values of equity, good deeds, effectiveness, respect for individuals, freedom, reciprocity, and solida-rity proposed in the Guidelines for Management of Ethical Issues in Outbreaks of Infectious Diseases, this article emphasizes the characteristics and laws of clinical studies on traditional Chinese medicine. Main points of ethical review of traditional Chinese medicine were summarized in the aspects of overall concept, syndrome differentiation and treatment, prevention before disease onset, cultural value, and clinical basis. Based on the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19), we collected relevant registered Chinese medicine clinical studies, summarized the core issues of the ethics review for COVID-19, and further improved the traditional Chinese medicine ethics review system and resources, so as to better serve ethical review and scientific studies in public health emergencies.

[Suggestions on design of evidence-based traditional Chinese medicine clinical study for new public health emergencies].

2019 novel coronavirus(2019-nCoV) has occurred for 2 months, and seriously affected the people's health in the world. Therefore, scientific prevention and control strategies and effective intervention measures are the only ways to solve the world problem. In the determination of intervention measures, not only the effectiveness evaluation, but also accessibility, treatment cost, inventory and production capacity and other relevant sociological issues shall be considered, especially in low and middle-income countries and regions. With the introduction of clinical epidemiological experiment design and evidence-based medicine evidence evaluation into the evaluation of curative effect of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM), TCM has officially entered the studies of syndrome regularity of new public health emergencies(such as SARS and influenza) clearly diagnosed by modern medicine for many years, as well as the development of relevant guidelines, consensus and paths. The results of curative effect show that TCM could significantly alleviate symptoms, control disease and tendency, reduce the occurrence of critical illness, and improve the clinical efficacy and the prognosis and quality of life of patients, which fully reflects the consciousness and self-confidence of traditional Chinese medicine workers. For the evidence-based evaluation of TCM intervention in new public health emergencies, the basic principles and general methods of clinical epidemiology and evidence-based medicine shall be followed to obtain high-quality evidence; besides, we shall also fully realize that clinical scientific study is carried out with the epidemic treatment as the primary task. The scientific hypothesis comes from the clinical problems unsolved. The scientific study conclusions aim to give feedbacks to clinical diagnosis and treatment regimens. The core elements of clinical trials are population(P), intervention(I), control(C), outcome(O), which are abbreviated as "PICO". The evaluation of intervention measures for new public health emergencies with traditional Chinese medicine shall have clear study objectives and a high quality, with a correct analysis method as the guarantee of real and reliable results. Then, the selection of patients, the de-finition of intervention measures and control measures, the development of end-point indicators, the clinical quality control under special epidemics, the data verification, and the data analysis methods to be adopted are all characteristics and key points that need special consideration. It is suggested that scientific experimental design, rigorous collection and scientific data analysis shall be conducted to reflect the therapeutic value of traditional Chinese medicine, so that the study results could be adopted and shared, and become the scientific evidence for China and even the global to republish the diagnosis and treatment regimens.

Core Outcome Set for Clinical Trials on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COS-COVID).

Since its outbreak in December 2019, a series of clinical trials on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been registered or carried out. However, the significant heterogeneity and less critical outcomes of such trials may be leading to a waste of research resources. This study aimed to develop a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials on COVID-19 in order to tackle the outcome issues. The study was conducted according to the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Handbook: Version 1.0, a guideline for COS development. A research group was set up that included experts in respiratory and critical medicine, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), evidence-based medicine, clinical pharmacology, and statistics, in addition to medical journal editors. Clinical trial registry websites (www.chictr.org.cn and clinicaltrials.gov) were searched to retrieve clinical trial protocols and outcomes in order to form an outcome pool. A total of 78 clinical trial protocols on COVID-19 were included and 259 outcomes were collected. After standardization, 132 outcomes were identified within seven different categories, of which 58 were selected to develop a preliminary outcome list for further consensus. After two rounds of Delphi survey and one consensus meeting, the most important outcomes for the different clinical classifications of COVID-19 were identified and determined to constitute the COS for clinical trials on COVID-19 (COS-COVID). The COS-COVID includes one outcome for the mild type (time to 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) negativity), four outcomes for the ordinary type (length of hospital stay, composite events, score of clinical symptoms, and time to 2019-nCoV RT-PCR negativity), five outcomes for the severe type (composite events, length of hospital stay, arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), duration of mechanical ventilation, and time to 2019-nCoV RT-PCR negativity), one outcome for critical type (all-cause mortality), and one outcome for rehabilitation period (pulmonary function). The COS-COVID is currently the most valuable and practical clinical outcome set for the evaluation of intervention effect, and is useful for evidence assessment and decision-making. With a deepening understanding of COVID-19 and application feedback, the COS-COVID should be continuously updated.