Quality assessment of guidelines for the management of <i>Mycobacterium tuberculosis</i> infection in children

Wang, M; Liu, F; Li, Q; Yin, Qin; Shen, A

doi:10.5588/ijtld.19.0224

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We also found that the specific approaches or methods used to elicit or identify value and preferences or resource implications were poorly reported. Similar findings were also observed in other guideline evaluations regarding other topics (21,48). Generally, the methodological quality relies on documented information, and reporting quality can to some extent also mirror the methodological quality (49).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

An evaluation of the reporting quality in clinical practice guidelines for hepatocellular carcinoma using the RIGHT checklist

Chen¹,

Meng²,

Ding³

et al. 2021

Ann Transl Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common malignant tumors worldwide.Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on the prevention, surveillance, diagnosis and management of HCC are essential to guide clinical practice. The objective of this study was to evaluate the reporting quality of the most recent CPGs for HCC published worldwide.Methods: We systematically searched literature databases and websites of guideline development organizations and medical associations to extract CPGs on HCC published between January 2018 and December 2020. We evaluated the reporting quality using the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) statement. We assessed for each of the 35 RIGHT checklist items whether the guidelines reported the corresponding information. We calculated the mean (± standard error of the mean, SEM) percentages of the guidelines' compliance with the items (reporting rate), both overall and for each of the seven domains of the RIGHT checklist.Results: We identified 22 guidelines, of which three (14%) were written in Chinese and 19 (86%) in English. The mean ±SEM overall reporting rate in the twenty-two guidelines was 56%±4%. The reporting rates of the seven domains were the following: basic information 81%±3%, background 58%±6%, evidence 58%±6%, recommendations 59%±5%, review and quality assurance 34%±10%, funding and declaration and management of interests 39%±4%, and other information 23%±6%. Conclusions:The reporting quality of the recently published guidelines for HCC was suboptimal. While there is no doubt about the great value of the CPGs' recommendations in clinical practice, the reporting in CPGs for HCC still needs improvement.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

An evaluation of the reporting quality in clinical practice guidelines for hepatocellular carcinoma using the RIGHT checklist

Chen¹,

Meng²,

Ding³

et al. 2021

Ann Transl Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, the highquality CPGs should always provide relative information on the appropriateness of recommendations in any clinical situation (39). Furthermore, it is notable that the values and preferences of the target population, as well as the cost and resource implications in the formulation of each recommendation (item 14a/b) were poorly reported, which was consistent with the results in the guideline evaluation regarding other topics (40,41).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

A reporting quality evaluation of the clinical practice guidelines for bladder cancer based on the RIGHT checklist

Cheng¹,

Wu²,

Song³

et al. 2022

Transl Androl Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) checklist was developed to improve the reporting quality in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). CPGs could provide the recommendations for key clinical issues with alternative care options and adherence to them could improve the outcomes. And, high reporting quality CPGs can assist health workers to incorporate the best evidence into the individual practice. There is no evaluation study on the reporting quality of CPGs in bladder cancer (BLCA). This study assessed the reporting quality of CPGs on BLCA and provided new insights for the development of CPGs in this disease.Methods: We conducted a systematic search in multiple literature databases, including PubMed, Wanfang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and China Biology Medicine (CBM) as well as the medical associations and websites of guideline development organizations. Relevant CPGs published between January 2017 and December 2021 were identified. Four trained investigators independently screened the extracted documents to include all eligible CPGs and evaluated whether the items in the RIGHT checklist were reported in each CPG. Subsequently, the reporting rate of each CPG and item, as well as the mean reporting rate of each domain in the RIGHT checklist was calculated.Results: A total of 23 CPGs related to BLCA were finally included, of which, 22 guidelines were written in English and 1 was published in Chinese. The mean reporting rate of the included CPGs was approximately 65%. The reporting rates of the items in each RIGHT domain were 77% for basic information domain, 75% for recommendations domain, 72% for evidence domain, 69% for background domain, 43% for funding and declaration and management of interest domain, 35% for review and quality assurance domain, and 41% for other information domain. The reporting rate was determined as the mean value in Office Excel 2019. Conclusions:The reporting quality of BLCA CPGs related to the domains of funding and declaration and management of interest domain, review and quality assurance domain, and other information domain is poor and warrants improvement in the future.

show abstract

Quality assessment of guidelines for the management of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection in children

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

An evaluation of the reporting quality in clinical practice guidelines for hepatocellular carcinoma using the RIGHT checklist

An evaluation of the reporting quality in clinical practice guidelines for hepatocellular carcinoma using the RIGHT checklist

A reporting quality evaluation of the clinical practice guidelines for bladder cancer based on the RIGHT checklist

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About