ObjectivesTo analyze the current methodological and reporting quality of both domestic and overseas clinical practice guidelines on acupuncture, and to provide reference for the development of high quality acupuncture clinical practice guidelines.MethodsGIN, NICE, AHRQ, PubMed, EMbase, AMED, CINAHL, WanFang Data, CNKI, VIP and CBM databases were electronically searched to collect domestic and overseas clinical practice guidelines on acupuncture from inception to September, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and evaluated the methodological and reporting quality by using AGREE Ⅱ and RIGHT tools.ResultsA total of 23 acupuncture clinical practice guidelines were included, in which three were developed by foreign institutions, and the remaining 20 guidelines were jointly developed by WHO Western Pacific Region and China Institute of Acupuncture and Moxibustion. Three foreign and two domestic guidelines were selected for evaluation. The AGREE Ⅱ evaluation showed that the domestic guidelines have higher scores in terms of " scope and purpose”, " stakeholder involvement”, " rigor of development”, " applicability” and " clarity of presentation”, while only " editorial independence” is lower. The overall recommendation is stronger than the foreign guidelines. The RIGHT evaluation showed that for three foreign guidelines, the " reported” items accounted for 52.38%, " unreported” items accounted for 38.09%, " partly reported” items accounted for 6.66%%; however, for domestic guidelines, the " reported” accounted for 45.71%, " unreported” items accounted for 40%, and " partly reported” items accounted for 14.28% respectively. Overall, the difference is not significant (SD<10%). Due to the specificity of acupuncture interventions, the use of AGREEⅡ and RIGHT to evaluate acupuncture clinical practice guidelines still had barriers to some extend on its applicability.ConclusionThe methodological and reporting quality of acupuncture clinical practice guidelines are relatively low. It is urgent to further improve the methodological level and reporting standards of the guidelines, and to develop evaluation tools for the acupuncture field guidelines.
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.
ObjectiveTo assess the methodological quality of guidelines for bronchoscopic alveolar lavage. MethodsCNKI, VIP, WanFang Data, CBM, Web of Science, PubMed, EMbase databases and medlive.cn, the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC), the National Guideline International Network (GIN), the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE), and the World Health Organization (WHO) websites were electronically searched to collect guidelines of bronchoscopic alveolar lavage from inception to December 2020. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of the guidelines by using AGREE Ⅱ tool. ResultsA total of 19 guidelines were included, with 5 from China, 5 from the USA, 3 from Europe, 2 from the UK, 1 from Australia, 1 from Israel, 1 from Spain, and 1 from India. The average standard score rates of the 19 guidelines in the six fields were 50.73% for scope and purpose, 20.02% for participants, 15.13% for formulation rigor, 36.40% for clarity of presentation, 3.51% for applicability, and 22.37% for editorial independence.ConclusionsThe quality of bronchoalveolar lavage guidelines remains relatively low.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the quality of guidelines concerning management of helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection, so as to improve the guidelines of low quality and promote the clinical practice of high quality guidelines.
MethodDatabases including PubMed, CNKI, Guidelines International Network (GIN), National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC), National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) and Google search engine were searched from January 2005 to April 2015 to collect guidelines concerning H. pylori management about recent ten years. The methodological quality of included guidelines was evaluated according to the AGREE Ⅱ instrument, and the difference in indications and recommended first-line therapy of H. pylori eradication among different guidelines were compared.
ResultsA total of 13 guidelines were included. According to the AGREE Ⅱ instrument, the highest scores were for clarity and presentation 92.6% (78%-100%) and the lowest were for editorial independence 35.7% (0%-92%). The mean scores for rest domains were: scope and purpose 70.2% (39%-100%), stakeholder involvement 41.4% (22%-75%), rigor of development 41.7% (11%-82%), applicability 58.1% (35%-85%).
ConclusionThe quality of guidelines for management of H. pylori infection is not high. Great efforts are needed to provide reliable and high quality guidelines, especially for the domains of stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, and editorial independence.
ObjectivesTo evaluate the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) of Chinese rehabilitation medicine.MethodsCBM, VIP, CNKI, WanFang Data and Medlive databases were electronically searched to collect CPGs of Chinese rehabilitation medicine from January 1979 to May 2018. Four reviewers evaluated the methodological quality of the CPGs by AGREE Ⅱ.ResultsA total of 11 CPGs were included, which involved 5 CPGs on nervous system rehabilitation, 1 CPG on bone and joint system rehabilitation, 1 CPG each on pediatric rehabilitation, internal medicine system rehabilitation, burn rehabilitation, earthquake rehabilitation and rehabilitation diagnosis and treatment criteria respectively. The results of AGREE Ⅱ score showed that the average scores on six domains were 65.3%, 28.0%, 9.3%, 42.1%, 6.3% and 4.0%. There were not any level A (recommended) guidelines. Two guidelines were level B (recommended after being revised). The other nine guidelines were level C (not recommended).ConclusionsThere are a few rehabilitation CPGs in China and the quality of methodology is low. AGREE's methods and concepts have not been fully used for formulation. The rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability and editorial independence of guidelines should be emphasized, so as to produce high level CPGs and improve clinical practice quality in rehabilitation medicine.
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 evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of clinical guidelines and consensus for esophageal cancer.MethodsDatabases including PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI were electronically searched and major guideline websites such as GIN, NICE, NGC and Yimaitong were also searched to collect guidelines and consensus for esophageal cancer from inception to August 2018. Two reviewers independently screened the literatures and extracted data according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and then evaluated the quality of the included guidelines using the AGREE II and RIGHT instruments.ResultsA total of 26 esophageal cancer guidelines and consensus were included. The mean scores for each domain of AGREE II was 49.63% for scope and purpose, 25.16% for stakeholder involvement, 23.42% for rigor of development, 49.25% for clarity of presentation, 16.91% for applicability, and 21.07% for editorial independence. The item with the highest reporting rate among the RIGHT evaluation items was 5 (84.62%), followed by 1a (80.77%), 1c (65.38%), 13a (65.38%), and 4 (61.54%), and the remaining items were all reported below 50%. Results of subgroup analysis showed that the guidelines and consensus developed based on the evidence-based medicine method had higher average scores in the six domains of AGREE II and the RIGHT score than the guidelines and consensus developed based on expert opinions or reviews. The foreign guidelines and consensus had higher average scores in the three domains of AGREE II (formulation rigor, clarity, editorial independence) and the RIGHT score than the domestic guidelines.ConclusionsThe methodological and reporting quality of the guidelines and consensus on esophageal cancer is low, with the guidelines and consensus in China even lower, requiring further improvement. It is suggested that the guideline developers should refer to the standards such as AGREE II and RIGHT to develop high-quality guidelines and promote their application, so as to better guide the standardized diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer.
ObjectivesTo assess the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines of cervical cancer in China published from 2014 to 2018.MethodsCNKI, WanFang Data, CBM, VIP, Medlive.cn, the National Guideline Clearinghouse, PubMed, The Cochrane Library and EMbase were searched for cervical cancer clinical practice guidelines published in China from January 1st, 2014 to December 31st, 2018. Four reviewers searched and selected the literature independently according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and assessed the methodological quality of the included guidelines by using AGREE Ⅱ.ResultsA total of 9 guidelines were included. The average score for each area was: scope and purpose 75.47%, stakeholders’ involvement 35.09%, the rigor of development 43.70%, clarity of presentation 87.74%, applicability 80.76%, and editorial independence 0%.ConclusionsThe quality of cervical cancer clinical practice guidelines in China requires further improvement.
ObjectivesTo assess the methodological quality of Chinese clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for respiratory diseases published in 2017, so as to provide evidence for developing and updating CPGs of this field in the future.MethodsWanFang Data, CNKI, VIP, CBM databases, Medlive and other related websites were electronically searched to collect Chinese CPGs for respiratory diseases published from January 2017 to December 2017. Four reviewers independently evaluated the quality of eligible guidelines by using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Ⅱ (AGREE Ⅱ) instrument.ResultsA total of 37 guidelines were included. The mean scores of the six AGREE Ⅱ domains (scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity and presentation, applicability, editorial independence) were 59.3%, 25.1%, 10.8%, 59.1%, 25.8%, and 7.3%, respectively. Only 1 guideline (2.7%) was recommended for clinical use, and 2 guidelines (5.4%) were recommended with modification.ConclusionsThe CPGs for respiratory diseases published in China in 2017 have higher quality than CPGs published prior to 2017, however great discrepancies exist when comparing with international guidelines of average level. More attention should be paid on the rigorousness of methodology and the practicality of content in the future development of CPGs.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of the clinical practice guidelines of acupuncture in China, in order to identify the status quo and challenges in the development of guidelines.
MethodsWe evaluated the quality of the 5 clinical practice guidelines of acupuncture in China through the guideline appraisal instrument "Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Ⅱ" (AGREE Ⅱ). Four appraisers rated 6 domains of each guideline independently.
ResultsFrom the assessment with AGREE Ⅱ, the mean scores of the six domains were as follows: "scope and purpose"55%, "stakeholder involvement" 27%, "rigor of development" 4%, "clarity of presentation" 55%, "applicability" 4%, and "editorial independence" 1%.
ConclusionThe quantity of acupuncture guidelines is small and their quality is low due to the lack of methodological issues.
