Preferred reporting items for overviews of systematic reviews including harms checklist: a pilot tool to be used for balanced reporting of benefits and harms

Βουγιούκας, Κωνσταντίνος; Liakos, Aris; Τσάπας, Απόστολος; Ntzani, Evangelia; Haidich, Anna‐Bettina

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.10.002

Cited by 197 publications

(145 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

135

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…PRISMA checklist). [19] The protocol available in Spanish including a summary in English. [1] We aimed to identify the most reliable CPGs therefore we used a definition for EB-CPGs previously reported [20] The inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria were: and preoperative clinical risk criteria and categories (See Online supplemental material 3.…”

Section: Multiple Medical Societies and Organizations Around The Worlmentioning

confidence: 99%

The quality of clinical practice guidelines for preoperative care using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review

Ciapponi

Elena

Sacha

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Our aim was to summarize and compare relevant recommendations from evidence-based CPGs (EB-CPGs). Methods: Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines. Data sources: PubMed, EMBase, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Tripdatabase and additional sources. In July 2017, we searched CPGs that were published in the last 10 years, without language restrictions, in electronic databases, and also searched specific CPG sources, reference lists and consulted experts. Pairs of independent reviewers selected EB-CPGs and rated their methodological quality using the AGREE-II instrument. We summarized recommendations, its supporting evidence and strength of recommendations according to the GRADE methodology.Results: We included 16 EB-CPGs out of 2262 references identified. Only nine of them had searches within the last five years and seven used GRADE. The median (percentile 25-75) AGREE-II scores for rigor of development was 49% (35-76%) and the domain ‘applicability’ obtained the worst score: 16% (9-31%). We summarized 31 risk stratification recommendations, 21.6% of which were supported by high/moderate quality of evidence (41% of them were strong recommendations), and 16 therapeutic/preventive recommendations, 59% of which were supported by high/moderate quality of evidence (75.7% strong). We found inconsistency in ratings of evidence level. ‘Guidelines’ applicability’ and ‘monitoring’ were the most deficient domains. Only half of the EB-CPGs were updated in the past five years. Conclusions: We present many strong recommendations that are ready to be considered for implementation as well as others to be interrupted, and we reveal opportunities to improve guidelines’ quality.

show abstract

Section: Multiple Medical Societies and Organizations Around The Worlmentioning

confidence: 99%

The quality of clinical practice guidelines for preoperative care using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review

Ciapponi

Elena

Sacha

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A predetermined written protocol of this overview was registered in the PROSPERO (International prospective register of systematic overview) database (https:// www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/), registration number: CRD42017077218. is overview was reported in accordance with the guideline of the pilot version checklist with Preferred Reporting Items for overview of systematic reviews (PRIOharms) [19].…”

Section: Registrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness and Safety of Acupuncture for Migraine: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

Xiao

Zhong

et al. 2020

Pain Research and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Migraine is a common neurological disease, which burdens individuals and society all over the world. Acupuncture, an important method in Traditional Chinese Medicine, is widely used in clinical practice as a treatment for migraine. Several systematic reviews (SRs) have investigated the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for migraine. Objective. To summarize and critically assess the quality of relevant SRs and present an objective and comprehensive evidence on the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for migraine. Data Sources. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, PROSPERO database, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biological Medicine (CBM), China Science and Technology Journal (SCTJ), and WanFang database (WF) were searched from inception to December 2019 and grey literatures were manually searched. Selection Criteria. SRs which meet the criteria were independently selected by 2 reviewers according to a predetermined protocol. Data Extraction. Characteristics of included SRs were independently extracted by 2 reviewers following a predefined data extraction form. Review Appraisal. The methodological quality, risk of bias, and reporting quality of included SRs were assessed, respectively, by a Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2, the Risk of Bias in Systematic reviews (ROBIS) tool, and the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis-Acupuncture (PRISMA-A) statement. The quality of outcomes was evaluated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Results. A total of 15 SRs were included. All the SRs were published between 2011–2019. Based on AMSTAR 2, 14 out of 15 SRs were rated critically low quality and 1 was rated low quality. According to ROBIS tool, 9 SRs (60%) were low risk of bias. With the PRISMA-A checklist, we found 11 out of 15 SRs were found adequately reported over 70%. With the GRADE tool, we found high quality of evidence indicated that the effective rate of acupuncture was superior to western medicine in treatment of migraine. Besides, acupuncture reduced more headache days and the times of using painkiller and was more effective in reducing the frequency and degree of headache than western medicine and sham acupuncture. Limitations. There might be some missing information. The accuracy of the conclusions may be decreased reduced since we were unable to synthesis all the evidence. Conclusions. Based on high quality of evidence, we concluded that acupuncture may be an effective and safe therapy for migraine. However, the quality of SRs in acupuncture for migraine still needs more improvement.

show abstract

“…PRISMA checklist). [19] The protocol available in Spanish including a summary in English. [1] We aimed to identify the most reliable CPGs therefore we used a definition for EB-CPGs previously reported [20] Discrepancies were resolved by a consensus of the whole team.…”

Section: Multiple Medical Societies and Organizations Around The Worlmentioning

confidence: 99%

The quality of clinical practice guidelines for preoperative care using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review

Ciapponi

Elena

Sacha

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Our aim was to summarize and compare relevant recommendations from evidence-based CPGs (EB-CPGs). Methods Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines. Data sources: PubMed, EMBase, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Tripdatabase and additional sources. In July 2017, we searched CPGs that were published in the last 10 years, without language restrictions, in electronic databases, and also searched specific CPG sources, reference lists and consulted experts. Pairs of independent reviewers selected EB-CPGs and rated their methodological quality using the AGREE-II instrument. We summarized recommendations, its supporting evidence and strength of recommendations according to the GRADE methodology. Results We included 16 EB-CPGs out of 2262 references identified. Only nine of them had searches within the last five years and seven used GRADE. The median (percentile 25-75) AGREE-II scores for rigor of development was 49% (35-76%) and the domain ‘applicability’ obtained the worst score: 16% (9-31%). We summarized 31 risk stratification recommendations, 21.6% of which were supported by high/moderate quality of evidence (41% of them were strong recommendations), and 16 therapeutic/preventive recommendations, 59% of which were supported by high/moderate quality of evidence (75.7% strong). We found inconsistency in ratings of evidence level. ‘Guidelines’ applicability’ and ‘monitoring’ were the most deficient domains. Only half of the EB-CPGs were updated in the past five years. Conclusions We present many strong recommendations that are ready to be considered for implementation as well as others to be interrupted, and we reveal opportunities to improve guidelines’ quality.

show abstract

Preferred reporting items for overviews of systematic reviews including harms checklist: a pilot tool to be used for balanced reporting of benefits and harms

Cited by 197 publications

References 62 publications

The quality of clinical practice guidelines for preoperative care using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review

The quality of clinical practice guidelines for preoperative care using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review

Effectiveness and Safety of Acupuncture for Migraine: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

The quality of clinical practice guidelines for preoperative care using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About