Critical Appraisal of International Clinical Practice Guidelines in Kidney Transplantation Using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Education II Tool

O’Donoghue, Katriona; Reed, Rhiannon D.; Knight, Simon; O’Callaghan, John; Ayaz-Shah, Anam; Hassan, Sevda; Weißenbacher, Annemarie; Morris, Peter J.; Pengel, Liset

doi:10.1097/tp.0000000000002255

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 101 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One guideline reached an “average” level of quality, while the remaining two scored a “low” level of quality. Domains in which the highest percentage score was obtained were domain 1 “Scope and purpose” and domain 4 “Clarity of presentation” since aims, target users, and key recommendations were clearly specified in all papers; this is in line with results obtained in previous evaluations, probably because these issues are essential for guideline drafting and therefore properly considered. On the basis of AGREE II items, the quality in these domains could be further improved specifying timing for follow‐up, stratifying recommendations on the basis of clinical features (eg, HPV status), or proposing alternative options for the use of different imaging techniques.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

A critical appraisal of the quality of head and neck cancer imaging guidelines using the AGREE II tool: A EuroAIM initiative

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDiagnostic imaging guidelines are increasingly embraced in oncologic imaging in order to improve examinations appropriateness and technical quality. The usefulness of guidelines employment in clinical practice is dramatically related to the quality of the guidelines themselves. However, an extreme variability in guidelines’ quality may occur. Following a European Network for the Assessment of Imaging in Medicine (EuroAIM) initiative, the aim of this study was to assess the quality of the available guidelines regarding head and neck cancer (HNC) imaging.MethodsA literature search was conducted to identify imaging guidelines focused on HNC. Selected guidelines were evaluated by four independent appraisers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation version 2.0 (AGREE II) tool, which comprises 23 key items, rated on a 7‐point scale (1—strongly disagree to 7—strongly agree) and organized within six domains. For each domain, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the agreement among appraisers’ scores.ResultsAfter literature search, three guidelines were selected and evaluated. One guideline scored “average” as overall quality, while the remaining two scored a “low” overall quality. The highest result (total score = 75.0% ± 19.3%) was obtained in domain 4 (Clarity of presentation) while the lowest (total score = 27.1% ± 4.2%) in domain 6 (Editorial independence). ICC analysis showed a very good agreement (range: 0.932‐0.961) among the four appraisers.ConclusionsOur results showed a heterogeneous quality of existing guidelines in HNC imaging. Issues raised from this appraisal should be considered when developing future guidelines on HNC imaging.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

A critical appraisal of the quality of head and neck cancer imaging guidelines using the AGREE II tool: A EuroAIM initiative

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…i.e. : 1/11 = 9.1% for Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia CPGs [34], 15/115 = 13.0% for kidney transplantation CPGs [35], 5/30 = 16.6% for fertility preservation in young women undergoing gonadotoxic treatment CPGs [36], 6/17 = 35.3% for pediatric traumatic brain injury CPGs [37], and 5/12 = 41.7% for treatments for oral cancer CPGs [38].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characteristics and quality of clinical practice guidelines for depression in adults: a scoping review

Zafra-Tanaka

Goicochea-Lugo²,

Villarreal-Zegarra

et al. 2019

BMC Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) should follow an adequate methodology using an evidence-based approach in order to provide reliable recommendations. However, little is known regarding the quality of CPGs for Depression, which precludes its adequate use by stakeholders and mental health professionals. Thus, the aim of this study was to conduct a scoping review to describe the characteristics and quality of CPGs for Depression in adults. Methods We searched CPGs for Depression in adults in eighteen databases. We included those that were published in English or Spanish between January 2014 and May 2018 and were based on systematic reviews of the evidence. Two independent authors extracted the characteristics, type and number of recommendations, and quality (using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II [AGREE-II]) of each included CPG. Results We included eleven CPGs, of which 9/11 did not include the participation of patients in the development of the CPG, 4/11 CPGs had a score ≥ 70% in the overall evaluation of AGREE-II, and 3/11 CPGs had a score ≥ 70% in its third domain (rigor of development). In addition, only 5/11 CPGs shared their search strategy, while only 4/11 listed the selected studies they used to reach recommendations, and 7/11 CPGs did not clearly state which methodology they used to translate evidence into a recommendation. Conclusions Most of evaluated CPGs did not take into account the patient’s viewpoints, achieved a low score in the rigor of development domain, and did not clearly state the process used to reach the recommendations. Stakeholders, CPCGs developers, and CPGs users should take this into account when choosing CPGs, and interpreting and putting into practice their issued recommendations. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12888-019-2057-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Poor applicability is a common problem of international guidelines. [16][17][18] The applicability of the guideline requires a large amount of investment of resources. The development group of the guideline should be fully aware of promotion and obstacles to implementation of the recommendations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of methodology and reporting quality of global guidelines on fever in children

Zhang

Liao

et al. 2021

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the global clinical practice guidelines on fever in children. We also aimed to select a guideline with good methodology and reporting quality to provide scientific reference for diagnosis and treatment of fever in children. Methods: The Chinese and English databases Embase, PubMed, Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang database, clinical guides, and the website of the Department of Public Health Administration were retrieved up to January 2020. The clinical practice guidelines on fever in children were included. The AGREE II instrument and Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare statement were used to evaluate the methodology and reporting quality of the guidelines. Results: Eight clinical guidelines for fever in children were included. Methodological quality assessment showed that the recommendation level of ISP, South Africa, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, China, and American College of Emergency Physicians were grade B (recommended with modification), while that of American Academy of Pediatrics, New South Wales, and South Australia was grade C recommendation (not recommended). No grade A recommendation guideline was found. The reporting quality from higher to lower was National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the Chinese guideline, American College of Emergency Physicians, ISP, South Africa, New South Wales, South Australia, and American Academy of Pediatrics. The guideline recommendations were similar in various countries, but they were slightly different in various aspects, including body temperature measurement and the timing of drug administration. Conclusion: There are limitations in the methodology and reporting quality of all eight global guidelines on fever in children. For future development of these guidelines, attention should be paid to improving applicability of the guidelines in terms of methodology. Additionally, the principles and explanations for formation of recommendations should be described, as well as the limitations of the reporting guideline in detail in terms of the reporting quality. Treatments of fever in children are similar in different countries, but there are still differences that require further research.

show abstract

Critical Appraisal of International Clinical Practice Guidelines in Kidney Transplantation Using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Education II Tool

Abstract: The quality of international CPGs in Ktx was variable, and most CPGs lacked key aspects of methodological robustness and transparency. Improvements in methodology, patient involvement, and strategies for implementation are required.

Cited by 7 publications

References 101 publications

A critical appraisal of the quality of head and neck cancer imaging guidelines using the AGREE II tool: A EuroAIM initiative

A critical appraisal of the quality of head and neck cancer imaging guidelines using the AGREE II tool: A EuroAIM initiative

Characteristics and quality of clinical practice guidelines for depression in adults: a scoping review

Systematic review of methodology and reporting quality of global guidelines on fever in children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About