A critical appraisal of the quality of glioma imaging guidelines using the AGREE II tool: A EuroAIM initiative.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e13553-e13553
Author(s):  
Sotirios Bisdas ◽  
Valeria Romeo ◽  
Arnaldo Stanzione ◽  
Lorenzo Ugga ◽  
Renato Cuocolo ◽  
...  

e13553 Background: Following the EuroAIM initiative to assess the quality of medical imaging guidelines by using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, we aimed to evaluate the quality of the current imaging guidelines in patients with gliomas. Methods: A literature search was conducted to identify eligible imaging guidelines considered in the management of adult patients with gliomas. The selected guidelines were evaluated using the AGREE II instrument by four independent appraisers. The agreement among the four appraisers was estimated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis. Results: Seven guidelines were selected for the appraisal. Six out of the seven guidelines showed an average level of quality with only one showing a low quality. The highest scores were found in Domain 1 “Scope and purpose” (mean score = 81.2%) and Domain 4 “Clarity of presentation” (mean score = 77.6%). The remaining domains showed a low level of quality and, in particular, Domain 5 “Applicability” was the most critical with a mean score of 41.7%. The ICC analysis showed a very good agreement among the four appraisers with ICC values ranging from 0.907 to 0.993. Conclusions: The available guidelines on glioma imaging emerged as of average quality according to the AGREE II tool analysis. Based on these results, further efforts should be made in order to involve different professional bodies and stakeholders and increase patient and public involvement in any future guideline drafting as well as to improve the applicability of these guidelines into the clinical practice.

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 209-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valeria Romeo ◽  
Arnaldo Stanzione ◽  
Sirio Cocozza ◽  
Lorenzo Ugga ◽  
Renato Cuocolo ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valeria Romeo ◽  
Arnaldo Stanzione ◽  
Lorenzo Ugga ◽  
Renato Cuocolo ◽  
Sirio Cocozza ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (9) ◽  
pp. e0217555 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peiying Zhang ◽  
Qian Lu ◽  
Huijuan Li ◽  
Wei Wang ◽  
Gaoqiang Li ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 126 ◽  
pp. 108930
Author(s):  
Valeria Romeo ◽  
Arnaldo Stanzione ◽  
Valeria Gaudieri ◽  
Carmela Nappi ◽  
Renato Cuocolo ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 395-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.N. Werner ◽  
B. Marinović ◽  
S. Rosumeck ◽  
R. Strohal ◽  
N.S. Haering ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 109906
Author(s):  
Moreno Zanardo ◽  
Roberta Gerasia ◽  
Lorenzo Giovannelli ◽  
Giuseppe Scurto ◽  
Patrizia Cornacchione ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 491-497 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmelo Messina ◽  
Bianca Bignotti ◽  
Alberto Tagliafico ◽  
Davide Orlandi ◽  
Angelo Corazza ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pieter F Fouche ◽  
Kristina Zverinova

IntroductionArrhythmias are a significant health burden in Australia, responsible for about 1% of deaths annually. The Australian Resuscitation Council (ARC) ‘Guideline 11.9 Managing Acute Dysrhythmias’ was designed to guide doctors, paramedics and nurses in the emergency management of arrhythmias. It is important to have high quality clinical practice guidelines to aid the treatment of these arrhythmias. The AGREE II tool utilised is widely used to asses clinical practice guidelines for quality. The objective of this study was to assess the quality of the ARC clinical practice guideline ‘Guideline 11.9 Managing Acute Dysrhythmias’.MethodsTwo raters assessed the six domains of quality of the ARC arrhythmia guideline using the AGREE II tool. The inter-rater agreement between the raters was measured with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 2, 1).ResultsInter-rater agreement was good at 0.73 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.88). Both raters assigned the ARC guideline 11.9 Managing Acute Dysrhythmias a score of three, for a combined score of three out of a possible seven on the AGREE II rating scale.ConclusionsThe use of the ARC guideline 11.9 Managing Acute Dysrhythmias is not recommended based on this assessment with the AGREE II tool. Emergency departments and prehospital systems should consider not using this arrhythmia guideline to guide their practice, but to look elsewhere for a higher quality guideline.


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 311-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmelo Messina ◽  
Bianca Bignotti ◽  
Alberto Bazzocchi ◽  
Catherine M. Phan ◽  
Alberto Tagliafico ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (11) ◽  
pp. 2781-2790 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Martino Doniselli ◽  
Moreno Zanardo ◽  
Luigi Manfrè ◽  
Giacomo Davide Edoardo Papini ◽  
Alex Rovira ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document