Evaluation of the quality of published SCI clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE II instrument: Results from Can-SCIP expert panel

Abstract Background In December 2019, a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was identified as the cause of an acute respiratory disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Given the lack of validated treatments, there is an urgent need for a high-quality management of COVID-19. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are one tool that healthcare providers may use to enhance patient care. As such, it is necessary that they have access to high-quality evidence-based CPGs upon which they may base decisions regarding the management and use of therapeutic interventions (TI) for COVID-19. The purpose of the proposed study is to assess the quality of CPGs that make management or TI recommendations for COVID-19 using the AGREE II instrument. Methods The proposed systematic review will identify CPGs for TI use and/or the management of COVID-19. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases, as well as the Guidelines International Network, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, and the World Health Organization websites, will be searched from December 2019 onwards. The primary outcome of this study is the assessed quality of the CPGs. The quality of eligible CPGs will be assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. Descriptive statistics will be used to quantify the quality of the CPGs. The secondary outcomes of this study are the types of management and/or TI recommendations made. Inconsistent and duplicate TI and/or management recommendations made between CPGs will be compared across guidelines. To summarize and explain the findings related to the included CPGs, a narrative synthesis will also be provided. Discussion The results of this study will be of utmost importance to enhancing clinical decision-making among healthcare providers caring for patients with COVID-19. Moreover, the results of this study will be relevant to guideline developers in the creation of CPGs or improvement of existing ones, researchers who want to identify gaps in knowledge, and policy-makers looking to encourage and endorse the adoption of CPGs into clinical practice. The results of this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. Systematic review registration International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO)—CRD42020219944

Download Full-text

The quality of clinical practice guidelines in traditional medicine in Korea: appraisal using the AGREE II instrument

Implementation Science ◽

10.1186/s13012-015-0294-1 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

Tae-Young Choi ◽

Jiae Choi ◽

Ju Ah Lee ◽

Ji Hee Jun ◽

Bongki Park ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Practice ◽

Traditional Medicine ◽

Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽

Practice Guidelines ◽

Agree Ii ◽

Agree Ii Instrument

Download Full-text

Assessing methodological quality of Russian clinical practice guidelines and introducing AGREE II instrument in Russia

PLoS ONE ◽

10.1371/journal.pone.0203328 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 13 (9) ◽

pp. e0203328 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Dina Ayratova Lienhard ◽

Lidiya Vacheslavovna Kisser ◽

Liliya Eugenevna Ziganshina

Keyword(s):

Clinical Practice ◽

Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽

Practice Guidelines ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Agree Ii ◽

Agree Ii Instrument

Download Full-text

Quality appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for diabetes mellitus published in China between 2007 and 2017 using the AGREE II instrument

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022392 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (9) ◽

pp. e022392

Author(s):

Yuting Gao ◽

Jinjing Wang ◽

Xufei Luo ◽

Xiaoyang Song ◽

Lian Liu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diabetes Mellitus ◽

Clinical Practice ◽

Correlation Coefficient ◽

Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽

Practice Guidelines ◽

Biomedical Literature ◽

Agree Ii ◽

The Mean ◽

Agree Ii Instrument

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the quality of the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for diabetes mellitus published in China over the period of January 2007 to April 2017.MethodsWe searched the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature database, VIP database and WanFang databases and guideline websites for CPGs for diabetes mellitus published between January 2007 and April 2017 in China. Two reviewers independently screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and extracted data. We used the the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool (Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Ottawa, Canada) to evaluate the quality of the included guidelines, calculated the scores of each domain and evaluated the consistency among the assessors via use of the intragroup correlation coefficient. And then we compared the results with Chinese CPGs and international CPGs. We conducted a subgroup analysis based on different classification criteria and compared scores of each domain subgroup analyses.ResultsA total of 98 guidelines were identified. The correlation coefficient within the group was 0.93, suggesting that the consistency between the evaluators was good. The scores of the six domains of AGREE II were described in median (IQR) as follows: scope and purpose 53.7 (50.0–59.7), stakeholder involvement 31.5 (27.3–37.0), rigour of development 19.1 (15.3–22.2), clarity of presentation 59.3 (50.0–64.8), applicability 18.1 (13.9–25.7) and editorial independence 0.0 (0.0–0.0). The mean score in each domain of quality of Chinese diabetes CPGs was lower than that of CPGs published worldwide but higher than the mean score of Chinese guidelines of all topics. A funding source, the updated version, organisation and publishers of the guidelines and target fields are all the factors influencing the quality of CPGs to a certain degree.ConclusionsA large number of Chinese diabetes CPGs have been produced. Their quality remain unsatisfactorily low compared with CPGs worldwide, there is still room for improvement. Chinese guideline developers should pay more attention to the transparency of methodology, and use the AGREE II instrument to develop and report guidelines.

Download Full-text