Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines for eosinophilic esophagitis using the AGREE II instrument

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 383-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfredo J. Lucendo ◽  
Ángel Arias ◽  
Olga Redondo-González ◽  
Javier Molina-Infante
Medicine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 98 (40) ◽  
pp. e17132 ◽  
Author(s):  
XiaoFeng Hou ◽  
Meixuan Li ◽  
Wenbo He ◽  
Meng Wang ◽  
Peijing Yan ◽  
...  

Heliyon ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
pp. e05612
Author(s):  
Jessica Arieta-Miranda ◽  
Abad Salcedo Alcaychahua ◽  
Gary Pereda Santos ◽  
Manuel Chávez Sevillano ◽  
Rosa Lara Verástegui ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 259 ◽  
pp. 385-391 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chunsong Yang ◽  
Zuojie Zhang ◽  
Lingli Zhang ◽  
Jinhui Tian ◽  
Dan Yu ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 519.2-520
Author(s):  
W. Bautista-Molano ◽  
E. Jauregui ◽  
L. Saldarriaga ◽  
M. X. Rojas ◽  
J. R. Pieschacón

Background:Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) in spondyloarthritis (SpA) serves as a tool for rheumatologists, health-care providers and patients in the selection of appropriate treatment framework in common clinical scenarios guiding decision-making processes. However, the quality of these guidelines has not yet been evaluated systematically in the field.Objectives:The aim of the study was to evaluate the quality of the CPG available for the treatment of axial and peripheral SpA.Methods:A systematic and scientific literature search between 2014 and 2019 was performed in order to identify and select CPG focused on the treatment of axial and peripheral SpA. The authors systematically searched the main guideline databases and guideline developer websites completing the search in PUBMED/MEDLINE and EMBASE. Four independent reviewers with methodological and clinical expertise in the field of SpA, assessed the eligible guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. Their degree of agreement was evaluated with the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). The statistical analyses as done using the R psych package.Results:Twelve CPG were selected for evaluation. The scores for each of the AGREE II domains were: scope and purpose 86% (range: 67–99%); stakeholder involvement 71% (range: 22–93%); rigour of development 61% (range: 29–82%); clarity and presentation 79% (range: 68–86%); applicability 48% (range: 21–71%); and editorial independence 72% (range: 19–92%). Most of the appraised guidelines could be recommended (n=12) or recommended with limitations (n=12) for use in clinical practice. The overall agreement among reviewers was moderate (ICC: 0.40; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.82). The CPG with the best quality assessment using the AGREE II instrument was the NICE guideline developed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. A slightly higher quality assessment of CPG developed by research agencies or guideline developers was observed, in comparison to those developed by scientific societies. Figure 1..ssessment cientific societies.eld of ocieties and XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXConclusion:Quality assessment of guidelines for the treatment of axial and peripheral SpA is good with an average of 69%. However, a cut-off point has not been clearly established. Measures should be taken to assure that CPGs are based on the best available evidence and rigorously developed and reported. Additional efforts are needed to provide high-quality guidelines that serve as a useful and reliable instrument for clinical decision-making process in the field of SpA.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document