<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Chen W</submitter><funding>Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China</funding><pagination>6159874</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8991401</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>2022</volume><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Well known for its good anti-inflammatory effect, curcuma longa extract (CLE)/curcumin (C) has a potential effect on osteoarthritis (OA), and a large number of researchers have completed several systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) in this research area. However, the methodological and evidentiary quality of these SRs/MAs need to be further evaluated, and whether these findings provide reliable evidence for clinicians remains controversial.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>Two researchers collected data from seven databases for SRs/MAs that are about randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on CLE/C for OA. Assessment was made for the SRs/MAs included in this article by means of the Assessment System for Evaluating Methodological Quality 2 (AMSTAR-2), the Risk of Bias in Systematic (ROBIS) scale, the list of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Nine published SRs/MAs were included in our study. According to the results of the AMSTAR-2 assessment, only one SR/MA was assessed as high quality. According to the ROBIS evaluation results, only 2 SRs/MAs have a low risk of bias. According to the results of the PRISMA checklist assessment, only 2 SRs/MAs studies fully reported the checklist, while other studies had reporting flaws. According to GRADE, a total of 59 effect sizes extracted from the included SRs/MAs were evaluated, among which no effect size was rated as high.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>CLE/C may be an effective and safe complementary treatment for OA. However, further standard SRs/MAs and RCTs are needed to provide an evidence-based medical rationale for this.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM</journal><pubmed_title>Quality of Evidence Supporting the Role of Curcuma Longa Extract/Curcumin for the Treatment of Osteoarthritis: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC8991401</pmcid><funding_grant_id>ZR2021MH2</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>2019-0234</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Yang Z</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Qi L</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Deng P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Chen W</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Si G</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Guo D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Shi H</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Dong C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Liu W</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Wang L</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Quality of Evidence Supporting the Role of Curcuma Longa Extract/Curcumin for the Treatment of Osteoarthritis: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Well known for its good anti-inflammatory effect, curcuma longa extract (CLE)/curcumin (C) has a potential effect on osteoarthritis (OA), and a large number of researchers have completed several systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) in this research area. However, the methodological and evidentiary quality of these SRs/MAs need to be further evaluated, and whether these findings provide reliable evidence for clinicians remains controversial.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>Two researchers collected data from seven databases for SRs/MAs that are about randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on CLE/C for OA. Assessment was made for the SRs/MAs included in this article by means of the Assessment System for Evaluating Methodological Quality 2 (AMSTAR-2), the Risk of Bias in Systematic (ROBIS) scale, the list of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Nine published SRs/MAs were included in our study. According to the results of the AMSTAR-2 assessment, only one SR/MA was assessed as high quality. According to the ROBIS evaluation results, only 2 SRs/MAs have a low risk of bias. According to the results of the PRISMA checklist assessment, only 2 SRs/MAs studies fully reported the checklist, while other studies had reporting flaws. According to GRADE, a total of 59 effect sizes extracted from the included SRs/MAs were evaluated, among which no effect size was rated as high.&lt;h4>Conclusions&lt;/h4>CLE/C may be an effective and safe complementary treatment for OA. However, further standard SRs/MAs and RCTs are needed to provide an evidence-based medical rationale for this.</description><dates><release>2022-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2022</publication><modification>2025-04-04T07:35:05.125Z</modification><creation>2025-04-04T07:35:05.125Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC8991401</accession><cross_references><pubmed>35399636</pubmed><doi>10.1155/2022/6159874</doi></cross_references></HashMap>