ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of pancreatic cancer guidelines using evidence-based methods based on the global burden of pancreatic cancer, so as to explore its status, region distribution, characteristics of coverage themes, and difference of therapies recommended by the guidelines of various quality, and to provide references for clinical decisionmaking. MethodsPubMed, The Cochrane Library (Issue 11, 2013), CBM, CNKI, and VIP, as well as the website of National Guidelines Clearinghouse (NGC), Guidelines International Network (GIN), and National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) were systematically searched for pancreatic cancer treatment guidelines. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE Ⅲ) was applied to assess methodological quality of included guidelines. ResultsA total of 14 relevant guidelines (including five evidence-based guidelines) were included involving seven countries of four continents (Asia, Europe, North America and Oceania) and four international academic organizations. There were only two domains, namely "scope and purpose" and "clarity of presentations" which got high average scores (more than 60%) among all 14 guidelines. The mean AGREE domain scores in guidelines varied with areas, and the quality of five evidence-based guidelines was superior to that established by consensus. According to the outcomes of AGREE Ⅲ, 11 guidelines were weakly recommended, while 3 were not recommended due to poor methodological quality. The subjects of 14 guidelines covered six treatment categories, including chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy, support therapy, radiotherapy, and interventional therapy. ConclusionThe overall methodological quality of pancreatic cancer guidelines is not high among different countries or regions. The quality of evidence-based guidelines is superior to that established by consensus. Chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy and support therapy were reccommended as predominant choice by these guidelines.
Objective To assess the methodological quality of clinical guidelines and consensus of lupus nephritis, to collect the recommendations of each guideline, and to provide references for clinical decision-making. Methods PubMed, CNKI, and CBM databases and related websites such as NGC, NICE, GIN, SIGN, and Medive were electronically searched from January 2012 to December 2020 to collect the clinical guidelines and expert consensus for lupus nephritis. After consistency evaluation by four evaluators, the methodological quality of the included guidelines or expert consensus was evaluated using AGREE Ⅱ. The relevant recommendations, evidence level, and recommended strength of each guideline in treating lupus nephritis were summarized. Results A total of eight guidelines and two consensus statements were included. Among them, eight guidelines or consensus statements were level B (generally recommended guidelines), and two were level C (non-recommended guidelines). Relevant recommendations mainly gave the corresponding treatment scheme according to the pathological type of lupus nephritis. Conclusion The methodological quality of lupus nephritis guideline formulation in China needs to be improved. The included guidelines and consensus can provide reference for clinical decision-makers. However, higher-quality clinical practice guidelines for the Chinese population are needed to be developed in the future.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on the management of acute gastroenteritis/diarrhea in children, then to compare differences and similarities of drug recommendations, in order to provide references for clinical practice. MethodsGuidelines concerning acute gastroenteritis/diarrhea in children were searched in CNKI, VIP, WanFang Data, CBM, PubMed and EMbase databases from inception to April 2015. The websites of GIN (Guidelines International Network), CGC (China Guideline Clearinghouse), NGC (National Guideline Clearinghouse), APP (American Academy of Pediatrics), NICE (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence) and the WHO (World Health Organization) were also searched for additional guidelines. The methodological quality of included guidelines were evaluated according to the AGREE Ⅱ instrument, and the differences between recommendations of included guidelines were compared. ResultsA total of 9 guidelines on acute gastroenteritis/diarrhea in children were included. Among them, 3 guidelines were developed by USA, 1 by Malaysia, 1 by EU, 1 by UK, 1 by South Wales, 1 by Australia and 1 by South Africa. Five guidelines were evidence-based guidelines, and the other 4 were non-evidence-based guidelines. The average scores of guidelines in six domains of AGREE Ⅱ were 79% (clarity of presentations), 74% (scope and purpose), 44% (stakeholder involvement), 35% (rigor of development), 32% (applicability), and 30% (editorial independence), respectively. The recommendations of management and treatment were almost consistent. ConclusionThe overall quality of included guidelines was not high. The domain scores of "clarity of presentations" and "scope and purpose" were higher, but the domain scores of "stakeholder involvement", "rigor of development", "applicability" and "editorial independence" needed to be improved. There is still no local guideline of acute gastroenteritis/diarrhea in children in China, so it's urgent to develop guideline that should be suite able for Chinese condition.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of guidelines for the management of delirium in adult patients in the last ten years, so as to provide references for updating, selection, implementation guidelines and delirium management optimization.MethodsWe searched guidelines from databases including PubMed, EMbase, WanFang Data and CNKI, and websites of guidelines from January 1st 2010 to September 1st 2019. Guidelines were comprehensively screened, evaluated based on AGREE Ⅱ and data was independently extracted by two researchers.ResultsGuidelines of NICE, RNAO and SIGN had higher scores, while CSCCM’s and IPS’s gained lower. Among domains of AGREE Ⅱ, Domain I (scope and purpose) and IV (clarity of presentation) scored the highest, with a minimum of Domain Ⅱ (stakeholder involvement) and V (applicability). Delirium management focused on screening, prediction, prevention and treatment both pharmacologically and non-pharmacologically, and information support.ConclusionsFuture development of delirium guidelines should follow the methodology of guideline development, update or adjustment, and dedicate to every domain, especially domain of application. Medical staffs can establish our own domestic guidelines based on high quality guidelines, to promote knowledge translation and delirium management.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of Chinese clinical practice guidelines published in domestic medical journals from 2012 to 2013 and compare with the quality of guidelines published before. MethodsCNKI, CBM and WanFang Data were searched to collect guidelines from January 1st, 2012 to December 31st, 2013. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and extracted data. The AGREE Ⅱ instrument was applied to assess methodological quality of included guidelines. ResultsA total of 78 guidelines were identified. Among them, 37 guidelines were published in 2012, and 41 in 2013. The scores of 6 domains' scores of AGREE Ⅱ were as follows:scope and purpose (24%), stakeholder involvement (11%), rigour of development (7%), clarity of presentation (32%), applicability (7%), and editorial independence (4%). The results of subgroup analysis indicated that, the scores in 5 domains (except applicability) of the guidelines published in CSCD journals were higher than those of non CSCD journals; the scores in 4 domains (except stakeholder involvement and applicability) of the guidelines received funds were higher than those of guidelines with no funds; and the scores in 5 domains (except editorial independence) of the guidelines published in 2013 were higher than those in 2012. ConclusionThe guidelines published from 2012 to 2013 have higher quality than guidelines published before 2012, but great discrepancies exist when comparing with international guidelines of average level. Chinese guidelines developers should attach importance to international methodology to develop guidelines, and use the AGREE Ⅱ instrument to develop and report guidelines.
Objective To verify the applicability of AGREE-China and select high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) or consensus for the management of fragility fractures (FF) in China by evaluating their methodological quality. Methods CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP databases and related CPGs websites were electronically searched. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and checked each other. Quality appraisal of CPGs or consensus were evaluated by AGREE Ⅱ and AGREE-China, and weighted Kappa value and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to illustrate the consistency of the two tools. Results Nine CPGs and sixteen consensuses were included. Among the six domains in AGREE Ⅱ, "scope and purpose" domain (62.22%) scored higher than "clarity of presentation" domain (45.67%). The "stakeholder involvement" domain (34.89%) and "applicability" domain (38.17%) both exceeded 30%, while "rigor of development" domain (18.79%) and "editorial independence" domain (13.33%) were lower. Among the five domains in AGREE-China, "conflict of interest" domain (72.80%) was higher, followed by "usability/feasibility" domain (49.87%), while "scientificity/preciseness" domain (20.36%), "effectiveness/safety" domain (25.20%) and "economic efficiency" domain (14.40%) were lower. The weighted Kappa value of recommendations from the two tools was 0.694 (P<0.001), showing moderate consistency. ICC values of the same items and two evaluators were all greater than 0.85 (P<0.001) with high consistency. Three high-quality CPGs were consistently selected by the two tools. Conclusion AGREE Ⅱ holds high consistency with AGREE-China; however, AGREE-China is more suitable for the quality appraisal of Chinese CPGs or consensus. The methodological quality of CPGs or consensus for the management of FF in China needs to be further improved.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines and expert consensus of chronic heart failure domestically and abroad.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, SinoMed, CNKI, WanFang Data, and VIP databases, and related websites were searched to collect guidelines and expert consensus on chronic heart failure published from January 1st, 2011 to December 31st, 2020. Four reviewers evaluated the methodological quality of the guidelines and expert consensus with the AGREE Ⅱ tool after the consistency evaluation training.ResultsA total of 17 studies were included (consisting of 11 English and 6 Chinese studies). The recommended levels were B level (recommend after modification) for 10 studies and C level (not recommended) for 7 studies. The AGREE Ⅱ standardized mean scores for various fields were 69.61% (scope and purpose), 34.20% (stakeholder involvement), 33.13% (rigor of development), 84.53% (clarity and presentation), 42.40% (applicability), and 37.09% (editorial independence). The methodological quality of English guidelines was generally high (level B for 10 and level C for 1), while all scores of Chinese guidelines or consensus in the 6 fields were mostly lower than the average (level C for 6).ConclusionsThe guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure requires further improvement in terms of stakeholder involvement and rigor of development. It should develop standards and methods to improve the quality for Chinese guidelines and expert consensus to better serve clinical practice.
Objective To assess the methodological quality of pediatric COVID-19 guidelines using the AGREE Ⅱ. Methods Domestic and foreign pediatric COVID-19 guidelines from inception to 1st Oct 2021 were electronically searched in PubMed, CBM, CNKI, VIP, WanFang Data, Medlive, NGC, GIN, and NICE databases and relevant websites. Two researchers independently assessed the methodological quality of the guidelines by using AGREE Ⅱ. Results A total of 21 guidelines were included. The AGREE Ⅱ results revealed that the average scores of included guidelines in 6 domains (scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, and editorial independence) were 62.70%, 36.24%, 20.34%, 50.42%, 22.12% and 53.17%, respectively. ConclusionThe methodological quality of pediatric COVID-19 guidelines is poor. Guideline developers should follow the requirements of AGREE Ⅱ in guideline development.
ObjectivesTo systematically review the methodological and reporting quality of the current global breast cancer screening guidelines so as to provide useful information for domestic study in the future.MethodsWe searched databases including PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EMbase, CNKI, CBM, WanFang Data and some cancer official websites to collect breast cancer screening guidelines from inception to February, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the quality of the guidelines by using AGREE II tool and RIGHT statement.ResultsA total of 11 guidelines were included, in which 5 guidelines (45%) were issued by the USA. The results of the quality assessment showed that: the average scores in the " scale and objective”, " participants”, " rigorism”, " clarity”, " application”, and " independence” of all guidelines were 83, 48, 60, 77, 53 and 79, respectively. 6 guidelines were evaluated as level A and 5 as level B. For the reporting quality, 3 guidelines were of high quality, including 2 in the USA and 1 in Canada.ConclusionsThe methodological and reporting quality of breast cancer screening guidelines are at present very satisfactory. The quantity of clinical guidelines shows an increasing trend. Multi-country contribution to one guideline is another trend. The evidence-based methodology has been accepted globally in the guideline development.
Objective To evaluate the quality of Chinese clinical practice guidelines published in domestic medical journals in 2011. Methods The following 4 Chinese databases including WanFang Data, VIP, CNKI and CBM were searched from January 2011 to December 2011. The quality of included guidelines was assessed by using AGREE II. Results A total of 75 guidelines published in 2011 were included. Among them, 10 guidelines (13%) stated the conflict of interest, 10 guidelines (13%) mentioned evidence-based developing, 5 guidelines (7%) performed evidence grading system, 8 guidelines (11%) performed recommendation strength grading system, and 4 guidelines (5%) performed both evidence and recommendation strength grading systems. The ratio of the 6 domains’ scores of AGREEⅡ were as follows: scope and purpose (18%), stakeholder involvement (11%), rigour of development (8%), clarity of presentation (34%), applicability (5%), and editorial independence (14%). Conclusion Compared with the guidelines published before, the guidelines of 2011 have a higher quality and some of them are progressively standardized in developing methodology.