scholarly journals Reporting quality evaluation of the stroke clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuya Lu ◽  
Xufei Luo ◽  
Xiaojia Ni ◽  
Haoxuan Li ◽  
Miaomiao Meng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Reporting Rate ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
The Right

Abstract Objectives To analyze the effectiveness and quality of stroke clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) published in recent years in order to guide future guideline developers to develop better guidelines. Participants No patient involved Method PubMed, China Biology Medicine (CBM), Wanfang, CNKI, and CPG-relevant websites were searched from January 2015 to December 2019 by two researchers independently. The RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) checklist was used to assess the reporting quality in terms of domains and items. Then, a subgroup analysis of the results was performed. Primary and secondary outcome measures RIGHT checklist reporting rate Results A total of 66 CPGs were included. Twice as many CPGs were published internationally as were published in China. More than half were updated. Most CPGs are published in journals, developed by societies or associations, and were evidence-based grading. The average reporting rate for all included CPGs was 47.6%. Basic information got the highest (71.7% ± 19.7%) reporting rate, while review and quality assurance got the lowest (22.0% ± 24.6%). Then, a cluster analysis between countries, publishing channels, and institutions was performed. There were no statistically significant differences in the reporting quality on the CPGs between publishing countries (China vs. international), publishing channels (journals vs. websites), and institutions (associations vs. non-associations). Conclusions Current stroke CPGs reports are of low quality. We recommend that guideline developers improve the quality of reporting of key information and improve the management of conflicts of interest. We recommend that guideline developers consider the RIGHT checklist as an important tool for guideline development. Trial registration 10.17605/OSF.IO/PBWUX.

scholarly journals Reporting Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines Regarding Gout and Hyperuricemia According to the Right Checklist

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Can Wang ◽  
Xufei Luo ◽  
Maichao Li ◽  
Lingling Cui ◽  
Xinde Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Reporting Rate ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
The Right

Abstract Objectives The Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) checklist was used to assess the reporting quality of 2009–2019 Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) regarding gout and hyperuricemia, aimed to improve the reporting quality of future guidelines.Methods We searched PubMed, the Chinese Biomedical Literature database, the Wan Fang Database, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure from January 2009 to June 2019 for relevant guidelines. We also searched the websites of guideline development organizations (the Guidelines International Network, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, the American College of Rheumatology, and the European League Against Rheumatism) (EULAR). Furthermore, supplementary guidelines reported in included articles were systematically searched, as well as Medlive and Google Scholar. Results Seventeen guidelines were included, of which one was in Chinese and 16 were in English. The mean reporting rate of the 35 items specified was 14.9 (42.5%), only five CPGs (29.4%) had a reporting rate >50%. Of the 35 items, three were very frequently reported. The reporting proportion of the seven domains (Basic information, Background, Evidence, Recommendations, Review and quality assurance, Funding and declaration and management of interests, and Other information) were 64.7%, 36.8%, 50.6% 50.6%, 42.9%, 8.82%, 33.8%, and 31.4%, respectively.Conclusion The reporting quality of the present guidelines for gout and hyperuricemia is relatively poor. We suggest that the RIGHT reporting checklist should be used by CPG developers to ensure higher reporting quality of future guidelines.

scholarly journals Reporting Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines Regarding Gout and Hyperuricemia According to the RIGHT checklist: Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Can Wang ◽  
Xufei Luo ◽  
Maichao Li ◽  
Lingling Cui ◽  
Xinde Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Reporting Rate ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
The Right

Abstract Background The Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) checklist was used to assess the reporting quality of 2009–2019 Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) regarding gout and hyperuricemia, aimed to improve the reporting quality of future guidelines.Methods We searched PubMed, the Chinese Biomedical Literature database, the Wan Fang Database, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure from January 2009 to June 2019 for guidelines regarding gout and hyperuricemia. We also searched the websites of guideline development organizations (the Guidelines International Network, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, the American College of Rheumatology, and the European League Against Rheumatism) (EULAR). Furthermore, supplementary guidelines reported in included articles were systematically searched, as well as Medlive and Google Scholar.Results Seventeen guidelines were included, of which one was in Chinese and 16 were in English. The mean reporting rate of the 35 items specified was 14.9 (42.5%), only five CPGs (29.4%) had a reporting rate >50%. Of the 35 items, three were very frequently reported. The reporting proportion of the seven domains (Basic information, Background, Evidence, Recommendations, Review and quality assurance, Funding and declaration and management of interests, and Other information) were 64.7%, 36.8%, 50.6% 50.6%, 42.9%, 8.82%, 33.8%, and 31.4%, respectively.Conclusion The reporting quality of the present guidelines for gout and hyperuricemia is relatively poor. We suggest that the RIGHT reporting checklist should be used by CPG developers to ensure higher reporting quality of future guidelines.

scholarly journals Reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines regarding gout and hyperuricemia according to the RIGHT checklist: systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Can Wang ◽  
Xufei Luo ◽  
Maichao Li ◽  
Lingling Cui ◽  
Xinde Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Reporting Rate ◽  
Biomedical Literature ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
The Right

Abstract Background The Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) checklist was used to assess the reporting quality of 2009–2019 clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) regarding gout and hyperuricemia, aimed to improve the reporting quality of future guidelines. Methods We searched PubMed, the Chinese Biomedical Literature database, the Wanfang Database, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure from January 2009 to June 2019 for guidelines regarding gout and hyperuricemia. We also searched the websites of guideline development organizations (the Guidelines International Network, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, the American College of Rheumatology, and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)). Furthermore, supplementary guidelines reported in included articles were systematically searched, as well as Google Scholar. Results Seventeen guidelines were included, of which one was in Chinese and 16 were in English. The mean reporting rate of the 35 items specified was 14.9 (42.5%); only five CPGs (29.4%) had a reporting rate >50%. Of the 35 items, three were very frequently reported. The reporting proportion of the seven domains (basic information, background, evidence, recommendations, review and quality assurance, funding and declaration and management of interests, and other information) were 64.7%, 36.8%, 50.6%, 42.9%, 8.82%, 33.8%, and 31.4%, respectively. Conclusion The reporting quality of the present guidelines for gout and hyperuricemia is relatively poor. We suggest that the RIGHT reporting checklist should be used by CPG developers to ensure higher reporting quality of future guidelines.

scholarly journals Protocol of an interdisciplinary consensus project aiming to develop an AGREE II extension for guidelines in surgery

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. e037107
Author(s):  
George A Antoniou ◽  
Dimitris Mavridis ◽  
Sofia Tsokani ◽  
Manuel López-Cano ◽  
Iván D Flórez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Consensus Conference ◽  
Professional Staff ◽  
Delphi Panel ◽  
Agree Ii

IntroductionAppraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) is an instrument that informs development, reporting and assessment of clinical practice guidelines. Previous research has demonstrated the need for improvement in methodological and reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines specifically in surgery. We aimed to develop an AGREE II extension document for application in surgical guidelines.Methods and analysisWe have performed a structured literature review and assessment of guidelines in surgery using the AGREE II instrument. In exploratory analyses, we have identified factors associated with guideline quality. We have performed reliability and factor analyses to inform the development of an extension document. We will summarise this information and present it to a Delphi panel of stakeholders. We will perform iterative Delphi rounds and we will summarise the final results to develop the extension instrument in a dedicated consensus conference.Ethics and disseminationFunding bodies will not be involved in the development of the instrument. Research ethics committee and Health Research Authority approval was waived, since this is a professional staff study only and no duty of care lies with the National Health Service to any of the participants. Conflicts of interest, if any, will be addressed by reassigning functions or replacing participants with relevant conflicts. The results will be disseminated through publication in peer reviewed journals, the funders’ websites, social media and direct contact with guideline development organisations and peer-reviewed journals that publish guidelines.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on prostate cancer using the RIGHT checklist

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Kefeng Liu ◽  
Yanfang Ma ◽  
Yongjie Yang ◽  
Jingli Lu ◽  
Jie Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
The Right

scholarly journals Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on gliomas using the RIGHT checklist

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Yongjie Yang ◽  
Yanfang Ma ◽  
Jingli Lu ◽  
Shuzhang Du ◽  
Jingmin Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
The Right

scholarly journals Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on pancreatic cancer using the RIGHT checklist

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Qiwen Zhang ◽  
Jingli Lu ◽  
Mengmeng Jia ◽  
Yanfang Ma ◽  
Mingyang Sun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
The Right

Reporting quality of 2014–2018 clinical practice guidelines on diabetes according to the RIGHT checklist

Endocrine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 65 (3) ◽  
pp. 531-541 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qianmei Wang ◽  
Yuting Duan ◽  
Jielin Liang ◽  
Ze Chen ◽  
Juexuan Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
The Right

scholarly journals Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on lung cancer using the RIGHT checklist

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Yongjie Yang ◽  
Jingli Lu ◽  
Yanfang Ma ◽  
Chen Xi ◽  
Jian Kang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
The Right
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document