YANG Qinbo 1 # , ZHOU Qi 2,3,4,5 # , HUANG Tianxiang 6 , GAO Xia 7 , CHEN Yu 7 , ZHANG Xianzhuo 6 , YANG Nan 2,3,4,5 , ZHANG Jingyi 2,3,4,5,8 , CHEN Yaolong 2,3,4,5
  • 1. Department of Nephrology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R.China;
  • 2. WHO Collaborating Center for Guideline Implementation and Knowledge Translation, Lanzhou 730000, P.R.China;
  • 3. Evidence-based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P.R.China;
  • 4. Key Laboratory of Evidence-based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou 730000, P.R.China;
  • 5. GRADE Chinese Center, Lanzhou 730000, P.R.China;
  • 6. The First Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P.R.China;
  • 7. The Second Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P.R.China;
  • 8. School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P.R.China;
CHEN Yaolong, Email: chenyaolong@vip.163.com
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Objectives To evaluate the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines published in Chinese journals in 2017.Methods CBM, CNKI and WanFang Data databases were searched for articles published in 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and evaluated the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines using the Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT).Results One hundred and seven clinical practice guidelines were included and a total reporting rate of 34.8%±0.1% in RIGHT. Among the seven domains of RIGHT, field on basic information had the highest reporting rate (56.8%) and fields on review and quality assurance had the lowest reporting rate (9.3%).The average reporting rate of RIGHT items of Chinese Science Citation Database (CSCD) articles was lower than non-CSCD [MD=−0.73, 95%CI (−0.78, −0.68)] articles. The average reporting rates of RIGHT items differed between Chinese Medical Association (CMA) journal articles and non-CMA journal articles [MD=2.30, 95%CI (2.26, 2.34)]. The average reporting rates of RIGHT items was lower in guidelines established by associations or institutes [MD=−3.78, 95%CI (−3.83, −3.73)], and was higher reported in Chinese medicine guidelines [MD=21.94, 95%CI (21.91, 21.97)].Conclusions The reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines published in journals of mainland China in 2017 is low in general, especially in fields such as review and quality assurance, funding and declaration and management of interests and other information. To improve this phenomena, it is suggested that guideline developers report the guidelines rigorously with international standard.

Citation: YANG Qinbo, ZHOU Qi, HUANG Tianxiang, GAO Xia, CHEN Yu, ZHANG Xianzhuo, YANG Nan, ZHANG Jingyi, CHEN Yaolong. Reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines published in journals of mainland China in 2017. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2019, 19(11): 1325-1332. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.201904085 Copy

  • Previous Article

    Analysis of the status of evidence for disease burden research
  • Next Article

    Quality and applicability assessment for systematic reviews on acupuncture treatment for primary depression