ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) guidelines, so as to provide evidence for developing similar guidelines. MethodsWe systematically searched TCM guidelines published in domestic medical journals from WanFang Data, VIP, CNKI and CBM. We also searched Google, Amazon.cn and dangdang.com by hand in order to obtain TCM guidelines published in monographs. And we used AGREE II instrument to assess the methodological quality of included guidelines. ResultsA total of 115 guidelines (87 published in domestic medical journals and 28 published in monographs) were included. Scaled domain percentages from highest to lowest were:scope and purpose (41%), stakeholder involvement (28%), clarity of presentation (33%), rigour of development (20%), editorial independence (9%) and applicability (7%). ConclusionThere is still a large gap about methodological quality between TCM guidelines and international guidelines. So the guideline developers should systematically search, evaluate and synthesize the evidence based on structured problems. At the same time, they also need to consider the costs of recommendations, the implementation environment and the patients' preference and values. On this basis, the developer could further increase the transparency and independence during developing TCM guidelines.
ObjectiveTo compare the similarities and differences in procedures between Western medicine (WM) and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) guidelines. MethodsWe systematically searched China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang Data, China Biology Medicine disc and PubMed from inception to May 17, 2022. Supplementary search of reputable medical institutions and organizations, as well as retrospective references were conducted and screened. We extracted and analyzed the basic information and guideline development procedure of the included handbooks. ResultsA total of 10 handbooks published from 2013 to 2022 were included, with four WM handbooks and six TCM handbooks. The median completeness of handbooks was 53.3%, with a maximum of 93.3% and a minimum of 43.3%. There are six handbooks with less than 60.0% completeness. The median reporting rate of the key steps was 65.0%, and the reporting rate of 5/8 of the key steps was more than 80.0%. Among the key reporting steps, role of funders, update methods, and conflict of interest management were reported at a low rate. Compared with WM handbooks, TCM handbooks reflected TCM characteristics in the procedure of topic selection, working groups, conflict of interest declaration and management, clinical questions, evidence, recommendations, report guideline, and external review. ConclusionThe completeness and reporting rate of the key steps need to be improved. TCM characteristics need to be further integrated when developing TCM guideline handbooks. We highly recommend that guideline stakeholders actively participate in handbook development to promote the quality of handbooks.