[Skip to Navigation]
Editor's Correspondence
December 13, 2004

Response to the Systematic Review of Tai Chi—Reply

Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(22):2500-2509. doi:10.1001/archinte.164.22.2504-a

In reply

My colleagues and I appreciate Ms Taylor-Piliae’s comments on our article1 and we welcome the opportunity to clarify several issues. We performed the data abstraction independently in duplicate, and discrepancies were resolved in conferences. We did not calculate inter-rater reliability.

Tai Chi has been practiced in China for many centuries, and many different styles and forms have been developed without clear standardized terminology or techniques. Also there has been inconsistent use of the English name.2,3 The term Tai Chi Chih used in the study by Schaller4 is the same as Tai Chi. Tai Chi is also known as Tai Chi Chuan, Tai Chi Chih, or Tai Ji Quan. Rather than arbitrarily select a single definition of Tai Chi, our systematic review reported the definitions and terminologies as used by the authors in their report.

Add or change institution