ObjectiveTo analyze the quality of evidence and the use of evidence grades in evidence-based integrated Chinese and Western medicine (ICWM) guidelines, especially the recommendations that include human experience evidence, and then provide references for future guideline development and the grading standards of human experience. MethodsThe literature search was conducted on the PubMed、SinoMed、CNKI、VIP、WanFang Data databases from January 1, 2021 to January 31, 2024, to conduct descriptive statistics on the integrated Chinese and Western medicine guidelines included. In addition, the recommendations that include human experience evidence were further analyzed. ResultsA total of 46 integrated Chinese and Western medicine guideline documents were included, of which 35 were evidence-based. A total of 1 189 recommendations were formed (including 492 TCM recommendations, 265 Western medicine recommendations, 338 integrated Chinese and Western medicine recommendations and 94 other recommendations). Among the 1 189 recommendations, 21.36% were not found in modern research evidence, of which 88.58% did not provide clear supporting evidence, 5.12% and 7.48% were based on ancient books and modern masters' experience, respectively. In addition, there were 29 recommendations with evidence from famous masters in 5 guidelines (1 evidence-based guideline), 16 of which only included famous masters' experience as independent evidence support, and 15 guidelines (10 evidence-based guidelines) included 84 recommendations with evidence from ancient books, with only 10 of them including ancient books as independent evidence support. ConclusionThe phenomenon of lack of clinical research evidence in recommendations in integrated Chinese and Western medicine guidelines is common. A few integrated Chinese and Western medicine guidelines include ancient books and masters' experience as the evidence for recommendations. However, the integration of human experience evidence into the evidence-based system is not uniform, and the results of the quality evaluation of the recommendations are also quite different.