Objectives To explore the health research capacity (HRC) and factors associated with professional and technical personnel (PTP) in a first-class tertiary hospital in northwest China. Methods We collected the repeated measurement data from a first-class tertiary hospital in northwest China between 2013 and 2017. HRC of PTP was assessed by a comprehensive evaluation system and measured by research capacity score (RCS). The participants were divided into research group (RCS >0) and comparison group (RCS = 0); participants of the comparison group were selected by two-stage stratified random sampling. Multilevel model for repeated measures was used to investigate the potential factors associated with HRC. Results A total of 924 PTP were included (308 in the research group and 616 in the comparison group). This study found consistent growth in RCS and associated 95% CIs for the hospital during 2013 and 2017. The linear multilevel model showed PTP with a doctorate degree had higher RCS than those with a master's degree (beta, 1.74;P<0.001), bachelor's degree (beta, 2.02;P <0.001) and others without a degree (beta, 2.32;P<0.001). Furthermore, the PTP with intermediate (beta, 0.13;P = 0.015), vice-high (beta, 0.27;P= 0.001) and senior (beta, 0.63;P<0.001) professional titles had higher RCS than those with junior positions. Compared with PTP in the administration, those in paediatrics had higher RCS (beta, 0.28;P= 0.047) though similar to PTP in other departments. PTP with an administrative position had a higher RCS than those in non-administrative positions (beta, 0.26;P<0.001). The RCS increased with the research fund (beta, 0.15;P<0.001). However, no associations were found between RCS and sex, age, ethnic, graduate school or technical type. Conclusions HRC with associated variation of PTP for the hospital in northwest China increasingly improved and degree, professional title, administrative position, and research fund were related to HRC of PTP. Multi-central prospective studies are needed to clarify the potential relationship of related factors and HRC of PTP.

Background Acupuncture is widely used worldwide, and systematic reviews on acupuncture are increasingly being published. Although acupuncture systematic reviews share several essential elements with other systematic reviews, some essential information for the application of acupuncture is not covered by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Considering this, we aimed to develop an extension of the PRISMA statement for acupuncture systematic reviews. Methods We used the PRISMA statement as a starting point, and conducted this study referring to the development strategy recommended by the EQUATOR network. The initial items were collected through a wide survey among evidence users and a review of relevant studies. We conducted a three-round Delphi survey and one-day face-to-face meeting to select items and formulate the checklist. After the consensus meeting, we drafted the manuscript (including the checklist) and sent it to our advisory experts for comments, following which the checklist was refined and circulated to a group of acupuncture systematic review authors for pilot test. We also selected a sample of acupuncture systematic reviews published in 2017 to test the checklist. Results A checklist of five new sub-items (including sub items) and six modified items was formulated, involving content related to title, rationale, eligibility criteria, literature search, data extraction, and study characteristics. We clarified the rationales of the items and provided examples for each item for additional guidance. Conclusion The PRISMA for Acupuncture checklist is developed for improving the reporting of systematic reviews of acupuncture interventions.