Distribution and persistence of Legionella in water systems.

J. Colbourne,P. Dennis

Abstract:The Legionellaceae are common aquatic organisms able to colonize man-made water systems. Inadequately maintained or seldom used systems provide ideal amplification sites, where the organisms grow and can be disseminated in aerosols. Legionellaceae can utilize, for growth, compounds leached from construction materials and the products of other organisms.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Quality of Critical Care Clinical Practice Guidelines: Assessment with AGREE II Instrument.

Zhonghua Chen,Yucai Hong,Ning Liu,Zhongheng Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.08.011

IF: 9.375

2018-01-01

Journal of Clinical Anesthesia

Abstract:Study objective: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are cornerstones for the management of critically ill patients. Numerous CPGs have been generated in critical care medicine, but their qualities have never been systematically appraised. The aim of the present study was to systematically assess the quality of critical care CPGs. Design: A systematic electronic search was performed in PubMed and Scopus. All critical care CPGs were included for analysis. Setting: Not applicable. Patients: Not applicable. Intervention: None. Measurements: The Appraisal of guidelines for research & evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument was employed to appraise the quality. CPGs were assessed independently by three raters and intraclass correlation coefficient to represent the agreement among raters. Main results: A total of 89 CPGs were included for quantitative analysis. The results showed that domaffil (scope and purpose) had the highest scores (0.93, IQR: 0.89-0.98) and domain 2 (stakeholder involvement) had the lowest scores (0.37, IQR: 0.30-0.46). The overall score was 0.83 (IQR: 0.67-0.83). Publication year was not associated with scaled scores in each domain. Domain 2 (stakeholder involvement) was significantly associated with the number of societies (coefficient: 0.702, p = 0.033). Also, greater number of societies were associated with higher scaled scores of domain 3 (coefficient: 0.768, p = 0.027), 4 (coefficient: 0.730, p = 0.029) and 5 (coefficient: 0.995, p = 0.023). Conclusions: The study showed that the reporting quality of critical care CPGs were suboptimal. The reporting quality varied across the six domains, with the highest quality in domain 1 and lowest quality in domain 2. Strenuous efforts need to be made to improve the reporting of critical care CPGs.
Appraising the quality of clinical practice guidelines in traditional Chinese medicine using AGREE II instrument: A systematic review

Liang Yao,Yaolong Chen,Xiaoqin Wang,Xiue Shi,Yongfen Wang,Tiankang Guo,Kehu Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.12931

IF: 2.6

2017-04-05

International Journal of Clinical Practice

Abstract:OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) published in journals and books using AGREE II instrument for further enhancing TCM CPG development.METHODS: A systematic search of relevant guideline websites and literature databases (including Chinese Guideline Clearinghouse, PubMed Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, VIP Online Publishing Platform, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and SinoMed) was undertaken from inception to December, 2015 to identify and select CPGs related to TCM. Four independent reviewers assessed the eligible TCM CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. Their degree of agreement was evaluated by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC).RESULTS: From 2380 citations, 115 TCM CPGs were included. The mean scores for each AGREE II domain were as follows: (i) scope and purpose (mean±SD=41.1±19.6); (ii) stakeholder involvement (mean±SD=37.6±15.1); (iii) rigour of development (mean±SD=20.1±10.9); (iv) clarity and presentation (mean±SD=33.3±15.4); (v) applicability (mean±SD=10.5±4.5) and (vi) editorial independence (mean±SD=11.4±7.6). Only 10% (n=12) TCM CPGs were rated as "recommended". The ICC values for TCM CPGs appraisal using the AGREE II ranged from 0.76 to 0.93.CONCLUSIONS: The quality of TCM CPGs has remained suboptimal according to AGREE II instrument evaluation. The use of AGREE II in the development process ensures that these considerations are incorporated, and more efforts must be made to improve the quality of TCM CPGs. Therefore, an evidence-based method should be used, and reporting the full texts according to AGREE II checklists for the further TCM CPGs development to ensure the translation of evidence into practice.

medicine, general & internal
The Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines in China: a Systematic Assessment.

Jing Hu,Ru Chen,Shanshan Wu,Jinling Tang,Gillian Leng,Ilkka Kunnamo,Zhirong Yang,Weiwei Wang,Xinyang Hua,Yuelun Zhang,Yanming Xie,Siyan Zhan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01893.x

2012-01-01

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Clinical guidelines are an important tool for improving service quality, the benefits of guidelines depend on their quality. In China, there has been a great increase in production of guidelines. However, little is known about their quality.METHOD:We identified Chinese guidelines published between 2006 and 2010 by searching three Chinese full-text databases, major Chinese guidelines websites and Google. Three appraisers independently evaluated each guideline by using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument. Subgroup analyses were performed according to source, title, version, aspect of care and developer of guidelines.RESULTS:A total of 327 guidelines were eligible and 57 were excluded for their lacking of any account of the guideline development methodology. Of the 270 guidelines, 77 (28.5%) can be recommended, 6 (2.2%) were evidence-based guidelines. Sixteen (5.9%) guidelines described the methods used to search for evidence, 61 (22.6%) appraised the quality of evidence and 53 (19.6%) graded the strength of recommendations. Two guidelines declared the involvement of methodological experts and none reported considering patients' values. 29 (10.7%) guidelines received drug company sponsorship but only two declared the views of the funding bodies did not influence the recommendations, 259 (95.9%) didn't declare the interest conflicts of guideline developers. Guidelines downloaded from Internet and with updated versions yielded higher quality than the rest.CONCLUSIONS:Although numerous guidelines were produced in China, the quality was generally low. Focusing on improving the quality of Chinese guidelines, rather than continuing to produce them in great quantity, is urgently needed.
Quality problems in clinical practice guidelines and guideline appraisal studies: Should we tolerate or eradicate?

Guo‐Xun Yang,Shu‐Qian Dou,Xiao‐Bo Liu,Ting Que,Yong Tang,Xin Wang,Long‐Zong Yan,Li‐Na Zhou,Cheng‐Bo Jin,Yuan Wang,Qi Wang,Kong‐Jia Wu,Wen‐Jun Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.14227

2024-10-31

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

Abstract:Background Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument have been widely used by scholars around the world to assess the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). We sought to identify items or domains that are commonly scored low in the assessment, and to systematically review the issues that emerged when evaluators used the AGREE II tool for guideline quality assessment. Methods A systematic search was conducted to identify articles published in medically relevant databases from 2022 to 2023 regarding the use of the AGREE II tool for the assessment of CPGs. We extracted six quality domains and overall quality assessment data of CPGs included in the literature, and processed the data using descriptive statistical analysis, difference analysis, regression analysis, and correlation analysis. A seven‐point Likert scale was used to assess the reporting quality of the included articles. Results 151 relevant publications were identified, including 2081 guidelines published between 1990 and 2022. The results of the regression analysis showed a statistically significant impact of all domains on overall guideline quality (p

medicine, general & internal,health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Analysis of the Status and Trends of Chinese Clinical Practice Guideline Development Between 2010 and 2020: A Systematic Review

Rong Zhang,Si-yu Yan,Yun-yun Wang,Qiao Huang,Xiang-ying Ren,Ran Tan,Yu-qing Deng,Lin-xia Su,Yong-bo Wang,Zheng-rong Zhao,Ying-hui Jin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.758617

IF: 3.9

2021-11-02

Frontiers in Medicine

Abstract:Objective: This study aimed to systematically review the status and trends of Chinese clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) during the time period 2010–2020 and explore their methodological characteristics. Then, based on the strengths and weaknesses in development, offer several recommendations for the quality improvement which will serve as a reference for the users and developers of CPG. Introduction: With the development of evidence-based medicine (EBM), the CPGs play an increasingly important role in healthcare decision-making both in China and worldwide. Inclusion criteria: The CPGs that have been used to help the health professionals in the healthcare decision-making were included. Methodology: The China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and WanFang databases were searched from 2010 to 2020 for the studies describing the general and methodological characteristics of Chinese CPGs. Comparisons of the methodological characteristics between the groups were conducted using the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. The M-K test was adopted to identify the monotonically increasing or decreasing trends of methodological characteristics over the timespan. Results: A total of 2,654 CPGs fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The quantity and quality of the guidelines developed in China have improved over the time span. From 2010 to 2020,the guidelines had differing characteristics and covered a wide range of subjects. In total, 2,318(87.34%) guidelines focused on Western Medicine. Eight (0.30%) had been developed for patient versions of guidelines, 10(0.38%) were tentative guidelines, and 16(0.60%) were rapid advice guidelines. Medical specialty societies (including their branches) (71.1%) were the main guideline makers. The most addressed diseases were neoplasms (14.43%). The target population is mainly adults (84.97%). The methodological quality of consensus-based (CB)-CPGs was obviously lower than evidence-based (EB)-CPGs. Except for the item, “recommendations were based on evidence of systematic reviews,” there were statistical differences in all other methodological items between the EB-CPGS and CB-CPGS ( P < 0.01). Higher methodological quality has been observed in EB-CPGs. All the data relating to the methodological characteristics indicated that higher methodological quality was present in the guidelines using GRADE ( P < 0.01). Conclusion: The quantity and quality of the guidelines developed in China have improved between 2010 and 2020. CB-CPGs have also paid attention to the methodology quality, but obviously, this is lower than that in the EB-CPGs.

medicine, general & internal
Quality assessment of type 1 diabetes mellitus clinical practice guidelines

Hang LI,Xiao-han XU,Suo-di ZHAI

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13699/j.cnki.1001-6821.2015.14.030

2015-01-01

Abstract:Objective To evaluate the quality of clinical practice guide-lines (CPGs) for type 1 diabetes mellitus(T1DM), so as to provide rec-ommendations for regulating the development of diabetes evidence-based clinical guidelines and updating the existing diabetes clinical guidelines. Methods CNKI, WANFANG, PubMed, EMBase, China guideline clearinghouse(CGC), national guideline clearinghouse (NGC), guide-lines international network ( G-I-N) were searched for CPGs published between January 1st 2009 and July 31st 2014 for type 1 diabetes.Two in-dependent assessors assessed the quality of each CPG using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation Ⅱ ( AGREE Ⅱ) instrument. Results Sixteen guidelines were evaluated in which 15 are in English and the other is in Chinese.The mean scores for each domain were:scope and purpose 72%, stakeholder involvement 53%, rigor of development 51%, clarity of presentation 72%, applicability 53%, editorial independence 49%.Five guidelines ( NICE, BOHTA, CDA, SIGN, NKF ) scored above 50% in each domain.Conclusion The overall quality of CPGs for glycemic control in T1DM is quite well.Greater efforts are needed to improve Chinese T1DM guideline quality, especially in the domain of rigor, stakeholder, applicability and editorial independence.
Quality appraisal of gestational diabetes mellitus guidelines with AGREE II: a systematic review

Mengxing Zhang,Yingfeng Zhou,Jie Zhong,Kairong Wang,Yan Ding,Li Li,Xiuhong Pan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-019-2597-8

2019-01-01

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Abstract:Background Several societies and associations have produced and disseminated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). However, the quality of such guidelines has not been appraised so far. This study aims to evaluate the quality of CPGs for GDM published in the last decade using the AGREE II instrument. Methods A systematic search of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, New Zealand Guidelines Group, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, Medlive, American Diabetes Association, Canadian Diabetes Association, International Diabetes Federation, as well as PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Chinese Periodical Database, and VIP Chinese Periodical Database was conducted from inception to June 2018. The quality was assessed by four trained researchers independently, using the AGREE IIinstrument. Results A total of 13 guidelines, published from 2009 to 2018, were finally included. Among them, 11 guidelines were evidence-based guidelines, and 2 were expert consensus. Scores for each of the six AGREE II domains(Median ± IQR) were 94 ± 11, 89 ± 53, 58 ± 37, 100 ± 6, 79 ± 48, 100 ± 71 and 67% ± 42%, and guidelines based on expert consensus generally scored lower than evidence-based guidelines (Z = -2.201, p = 0.028). Overall score of 10 guidelines were 5 points and above, and four guidelines were 7 points. Among six domains, two domains: Scope and Purpose, and Clarity of Presentation, had high scores; however, the domains of Rigor of Development, Stakeholder Involvement and Editorial Independence received lower scores. Conclusions In general, the methodological quality of GDM guidelines is high, and evidence-based guidelines are superior to expert consensus. However, the domains of Rigor of Development, Stakeholder Involvement and Editorial Independence still need improvement. A systematic approach in the development of these guidelines and updating timely is needed. In some regions, more attention for guideline adaptation is recommended.
Using the RIGHT statement to evaluate the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines in traditional Chinese medicine

Xia Yun,Chen Yaolong,Zeng Zhao,Zhou Qi,Wang Yangyang,Xie Runshen,Xie Xiuli,Li Hui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0207580

IF: 3.7

2018-11-16

PLoS ONE

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM).METHODS: A systematic search was undertaken to extract CPGs for TCM. The RIGHT (Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in Healthcare) statement was used to calculate scores for the reporting quality in terms of domains and items, followed by a subgroup analysis of the results and determination of the correlation between the RIGHT and AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) scores.RESULTS: Overall, 539 TCM CPGs were included. (1) The mean scores (Med, IQR) for each RIGHT domain were as follows: basic information (4, 1), background (3, 2), evidence (0, 0), recommendations (2, 2), review and quality assurance (0, 0), funding and declaration and management of interests (0, 0.5), and other information (0, 0). (2) The items with a low reporting rate (<10%) included 2, 5, 8b, 9a, 10a, 10b, 11a, 11b, 14a, 14b, 14c, 16, 17, 19b, 20, 21, and 22, and those with a high reporting rate (> 90%) included 1a, 1b, 1c, 7b, 13a, and 13b. (3) In recent years, the reporting quality of TCM CPGs has improved, and there was a significant difference among the organizations (P = 0.000), where that of the updated versions was greater than that of the historical versions (P = 0.047). (4) The RIGHT and AGREE II scores were positively correlated (P = 0.014).CONCLUSIONS: At present, although the reporting quality of TCM CPGs is improving, the overall quality remains suboptimal. Guideline developers should strictly follow the evidence-based process of developing guidelines and should follow the RIGHT statement to produce a standardized report when writing guidelines.

multidisciplinary sciences
Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines for adult obstructive sleep apnea: A systematic review

Xiaopan Xu,Qianqian Peng,Ling Meng,Hualu Yang,Yingzhen Wang,Yan Luo,Min Dong,Changyu Wang,Mian Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sleep.2024.03.045

IF: 4.842

2024-04-06

Sleep Medicine

Abstract:Objective Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) are crucial in standardizing the management of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in adults. However, there has been insufficient evaluation of the overall quality of CPGs for adult OSA. This review aimed to comprehensively assess the overall quality of CPGs in the field of adult OSA. Methods A systematic search was conducted on various literature databases, guideline-related databases, and academic websites from January 2013 to December 2023 to select CPGs relevant to adult OSA. The methodological and reporting quality of the eligible CPGs were thoroughly appraised by three reviewers using the AGREE II instrument and RIGHT checklist, respectively. Results This review included 44 CPGs, consisting of 42 CPGs in English and 2 CPGs in Chinese. The assessment of methodological quality revealed that four domains attained an average standardized score above 60%. Among the domains, "clarity of presentation" received the highest standardized score of 85.10%, while the lowest standardized score was observed in the "rigor of development" domain with the value of 56.77%. The evaluation of reporting quality indicated an overall reporting rate of 51.30% for the eligible CPGs, with only three domains achieving an average reporting rate higher than 50%. The domain with the highest reporting rate was "basic information" at 60.61%, while the domain with the lowest reporting rate was "review and quality assurance" at 15.91%. Furthermore, a significantly positive correlation was found between the AGREE II standardized scores and the RIGHT reporting rates ( r = 0.808, P < 0.001). Conclusions The overall quality of the currently available guidelines for adult OSA demonstrated considerable variability. Researchers should prioritize the utilization of evidence-based methods and adhere to the items listed in the RIGHT checklist when developing CPGs to enhance efficient clinical decision-making and promote the translation of evidence into practice.

clinical neurology
Methodological and reporting quality of pediatric clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review

Shu Zhang,Lei Wu,Yang Wang,Qi Zhou,Xufei Luo,Joseph L. Mathew,Qi Wang,Yang Song,Yaolong Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/atm-21-2686

IF: 3.616

2021-08-01

Annals of Translational Medicine

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Pediatric clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) can provide systematically developed clinical recommendations to guide pediatric clinicians and patients making decisions. This study aims to assess the methodological and reporting quality of pediatric CPGs.METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search of MEDLINE from 1 January 1990 to 2 April 2020 to identify pediatric CPGs published in the ten highest-impact pediatric journals and four highest-impact general medical journals. Two researchers evaluated the methodological and reporting quality of pediatric CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument and Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Health care (RIGHT) checklist. We calculated the mean AGREE II scores and compliance to RIGHT overall, and for each domain of the respective tools. We compared the methodological and reporting quality by different time periods and calculated the correlation between the AGREE II score and compliance to RIGHT.RESULTS: A total of 159 pediatric CPGs were identified. The mean (± standard deviation) scores for the six domains of the AGREE II instrument were as follows: scope and purpose 74.5%±14.2%, stakeholder involvement 42.7%±16.2%, rigour of development 18.7%±14.2%, clarity of presentation 56.5%±17.0%, applicability 8.9%±12.7% and editorial independence 25.2%±34.6%. The overall assessment score was 37.8%±12.4%. The mean compliance to RIGHT items in the seven domains of the checklist were: basic information 73.6%±14.9%, background 67.1%±16.4%, evidence 32.7%±27.2%, recommendations 32.4%±22.5%, review and quality assurance 22.9%±40.4%, funding and declaration and management of interests 24.1%±36.3%, and other information 45.3%±30.1%. The overall reporting rate for RIGHT was 46.4%±16.6%. Both the AGREE II scores and RIGHT reporting rates increased over time. We found a high positive correlation between AGREE II scores and RIGHT reporting compliance (r=0.645, P<0.001).DISCUSSION: The methodological and reporting quality of pediatric CPGs have improved over time, but remain still suboptimal and needs to be further improved. An international database of pediatric guidelines is urgently needed to identify and promote high-quality guidelines and guide clinical practice in pediatrics.

oncology,medicine, research & experimental
An Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: What Attitude Should We Have Towards the Guidelines?

Hongliang Tian,Chao Ding,Jianfeng Gong,Ning Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14309/00000434-201610001-00614

2016-01-01

Abstract:Introduction: The guideline development process should be precise and rigorous to ensure that the results are reproducible and not vague. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) play an important role in healthcare system. To determine the quality of guidelines the Appraisal of Guidelines and Research and Evaluation (AGREEII) instrument was developed and introduced. Methods: Eight databases (included MEDLINE and EMBASE) and guideline websites were searched until/up to April, 2016. The methodological quality of the guidelines was assessed by four authors independently using the AGREEII instrument. Results: From 1366 citations, 58 relevant guidelines were included. The overall agreement among reviewers was moderate (Intra-class correlation coefficient=0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.84). The mean scores were moderate for the domains “scope and purpose” (53.54) and “rigor of development” (61.24), however, there were low for the domains “clarity of presentation” (24.36), “stakeholder involvement” (31.27), “applicability” (26.52) and “editorial independence” (28.45). Four sixths domains scores were lower when compared with international average level. There were 10(17.24%) guidelines described the systematic methods for searching. And only 9(15.52%) guidelines reported methodological expertise were included in guideline developing teams. According to the AGREEII instrument, 7 guidelines can be strongly recommended, 16 with provisos and alterations while the remaining cannot be recommended for adaptation due to poor methodological quality. Meanwhile, we didn't find the difference in six domains quality related to publication year of AGREEII (before or after 2010). Meanwhile, guidelines published in guideline databases were significantly have a higher scores than that in journals. Conclusion: Although existing inflammatory bowel disease guidelines may accurately reflect agreed clinical practice, many guidelines lack proper methodological quality. Future guidelines should place more emphasis on these methodological shortcoming and provide high-quality guidelines for clinical decision-making in this field.Figure 1
Clinical practice guidelines of Chinese patent medicine in China: A critical review

Jian-Xin Wang,Rui Sun,Dong-Xu Si,Man-Ping Guo,Lijing Zhang,Yuan-Yuan Sun,Xue-Min Gao,Rui Gao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2024.103077

2024-08-23

Abstract:Objectives: To analyze the methodology, evidence, recommendations, quality, and implementation of traditional Chinese patent medicine (CPM) guidelines. Methods: We retrieved clinical application guidelines of CPM published from 2019 to 2022. Independent screening and data extraction were performed by two evaluators. The basic information about the guidelines, including evidence and recommendations, were extracted and statistically analyzed. Quality and implementation were evaluated using the Implementation Evaluation Tool and Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II. Results: In total, 29 guidelines were analyzed, including 262 recommendations and 2308 references. All the CPM guidelines followed the principle of "evidence as a core, consensus as a supplement, and experience as a reference" and the methods provided by WHO Handbook. An average of 89 references were cited in each guideline and 8 in each recommendation. Randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews constituted 89 % and 0.9 %, respectively, of all references. Low or very low-quality evidence characterized 74.5 % and weak recommendations characterized 83.6 %. Of all recommendations, 13.7 % were based on expert consensus, and 9.5 % of strong recommendations were based on low or very low-quality evidence. The AGREE II scores for each domain were: scope and purpose (79.63 %) and editorial independence (79.27 %), followed by clarity of presentation (72.59 %), stakeholder involvement (69.99 %), rigor of development (53.97 %) and applicability (5.11 %). The implementation quality of most guidelines was either high (44.8 %) or moderate (55.2 %). Conclusions: The results for CPM guidelines were impressive in terms of methodology, quality, and implementation. However, confidence in CPM recommendations was downgraded by low quality of evidence.
Using AGREE II reporting checklist to evaluate the quality of Tuina clinical practice guidelines

Fan Huang,Yue Zhang,Chuyu Huang,Mingwang Qiu,Siyi Zhao,Junquan Liang,Zhiyong Fan,Shan Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.961886

IF: 3.9

2023-04-18

Frontiers in Medicine

Abstract:Objective The objective of this study is to evaluate the methodological quality of Tuina clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Methods Computer searches of China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Technical Periodicals (VIP), Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and other databases were conducted to search for published guidelines on Tuina, with a search time frame from database creation to March 2021. Four evaluators independently used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument to evaluate the quality of the included guidelines. Results A total of eight guidelines related to Tuina were included in this study. The quality of reporting was low in all included guidelines. The highest quality report had a total score of 404 and was rated as “highly recommended.” The worst guideline had a final score of 241 and was rated as “not recommended.” Overall, 25% of the included guidelines were recommended for clinical use, 37.5% were recommended after revision, and 37.5% were not recommended. Conclusion The number of existing Tuina clinical practice guidelines is limited. The methodological quality is low, far from the internationally accepted clinical practice guideline development and reporting norms. In the future, reporting specifications of guidelines and the methodology of guideline development, including the rigor of the guideline development process, the clarity, application, and independence of reporting, should be emphasized in the development of the Tuina guidelines. These initiatives could improve the quality and applicability of clinical practice guidelines to guide and standardize the clinical practice of Tuina.

medicine, general & internal
An appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for constipation: a right attitude towards to guidelines

Hongliang Tian,Chao Ding,Jianfeng Gong,Xiaolong Ge,Lynne V. McFarland,Lili Gu,Qiyi Chen,Chunlian Ma,Weiming Zhu,Jieshou Li,Ning Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-016-0466-8

2016-01-01

BMC Gastroenterology

Abstract:Background Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are formally developed statements that assist users to provide proper health care for a kind of disease and play a significant contribution in healthcare system. This study report the methodological quality of CPGs on constipation. Methods The “Appraisal of Guidelines and Research and Evaluation” (AGREEII) instrument was developed to determine the quality of CPGs. A comprehensive search was developed using five databases and three guideline websites until/up to December, 2015. Four independent authors evaluated the methodological issues of the CPGs by the AGREEII instrument. Results We identified 22 relevant guidelines on constipation from 1234 citations. The overall agreement among evaluators was 0.84 using the intra-class correlation coefficient. The mean AGREEII scores for the domains “scope and purpose” (51.77) and “rigor of development” (56.73) were moderate; afterward, three domains “stakeholder involvement” (32.23), “editorial independence” (29.59) and “applicability” (29.14) were low scores. The “clarity and presentation” (23.73) had the lowest scores. Conclusion Although existing constipation guidelines may accurately reflect current clinical practices, many guidelines’ methodological quality is low. Therefore, more emphasis and attentions should be taken to the development of high-quality guidelines.
Quality of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Guidelines is Suboptimal: an Evaluation Using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument

Min Zeng,Qiusha Yi,Linan Zeng,Zhe Chen,Xue Mi,Haoxin Song,Xianglin Zhang,Youping Li,Qiang Wang,Rongsheng Zhao,Liyan Miao,Lingli Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.10.007

IF: 7.407

2019-01-01

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Abstract:Objectives: Although therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) guidelines are available, systematic evaluations of their methodological quality are scarce. This study aimed to assess the quality of current TDM guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. Study Design and Setting: We performed a systematic search to identify the relevant TDM guidelines in PubMed, EMBASE, CNKI, Wan Fang Database, CBM, VIP, four main guideline databases (NICE, NGC, GIN, and WHO guideline databases), and official websites of the governments and societies associated with TDM from the inception date to May 2018. Four independent appraisers rated the quality of each TDM guideline using the AGREE II instrument, and the mean score of each AGREE II item was calculated. The overall agreement among the appraisers was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: Twenty-eight TDM guidelines satisfied the eligibility criteria from among 12,235 references. The overall agreement among the appraisers was substantial (0.700-0.880). The mean scores for the six AGREE II domains were scope and purpose, 67.7% (95% CI, 64.0-71.4%); stakeholder involvement, 39.8% (95% CI, 33.3-46.3%); rigor of development, 36.0% (95% CI, 28.1-43.9%); clarity and presentation, 61.6% (95% CI, 55.7-67.4%); applicability, 30.6% (95% CI, 26.4-34.8%); and editorial independence, 49.2% (95% CI, 40.0-58.6%). The reviewers recommended only four guidelines, and most of the TDM guidelines were rated as "recommended with modifications." Conclusion: Overall, the quality of TDM guidelines is suboptimal according to the evaluation using the AGREE II instrument. The domains of applicability, rigor of development, stakeholder involvement, and editorial independence of the guidelines need to be reported. In addition, guideline developers closely adhering to the AGREE II instrument and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation system are required to draft high-quality and reliable TDM guidelines. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier Inc.
Development and Preliminary Verification of the Evaluation System for Clinical Practice Guidelines in China

Ji-Yao Wang,Qiang Wang,Xiao-Qin Wang,Xue-Juan Jin,Bo-Heng Zhang,Shi-Yao Chen,Xue-Cheng Gao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cdtm.2019.08.007

2020-01-01

Chronic Diseases and Translational Medicine

Abstract:Objective::Clinical practice guidelines can improve healthcare processes and patient outcomes; however, the quality of these guidelines varies greatly in China. The aim of this study was to construct a comprehensive instrument for the appraisal of clinical practice guidelines in China (AGREE-CHINA), and to validate its reliability as a tool for helping potential guideline users in assessing guideline quality.Methods::First, an interdisciplinary working group was established for developing the methods. They also created a checklist as a tool according to the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) standards, considering the particularity of Chinese clinical practice. Next, the first draft of AGREE-China was developed by vote, modification, preliminary trial, and cross-verification. To ensure the objectivity, credibility, and reproducibility of the draft assessment, all of the checklists and standards were cross-reviewed fairly widely. Finally, AGREE-CHINA and AGREE II were used to assess the Chinese guidelines published in the past five years, and the results were compared.Results::The presented AGREE-CHINA covered five main checkpoints (science and rigor, effectiveness and safety, economy, usability and feasibility, and conflicts of interest) with each point divided into several more specific checkpoints. Definitions and rationales for each main checkpoint appear in the Appendix. The quality ratings based on the total scores of AGREE-China and AGREE II were consistent ( r = 0.508, P = 0.020). Compared with AGREE II, the study showed a higher level of interrater-reliability for AGREE-CHINA overall (ICC = 0.957, P < 0.001). The mean time required for AGREE-CHINA was less than that for AGREE II; this was approximately 30 minutes for every assessment. User satisfaction was generally high. Conclusions::This paper has presented the first edition of the AGREE-CHINA appraisal tool for clinical guidelines. It is quick and easy to use; it assesses and performs well in comparison to AGREE II. This first version of AGREE-CHINA will require further development and validation.
An exploration of how developers use qualitative evidence: content analysis and critical appraisal of guidelines

Yun-Yun Wang,Dan-Dan Liang,Cui Lu,Yue-Xian Shi,Jing Zhang,Yue Cao,Cheng Fang,Di Huang,Ying-Hui Jin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01041-8

2020-06-17

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Abstract:Abstract Background Clinical practice guidelines have become increasingly widely used to guide quality improvement of clinical practice. Qualitative research may be a useful way to improve the quality and implementation of guidelines. The methodology for qualitative evidence used in guidelines development is worthy of further research. Methods A comprehensive search was made of WHO, NICE, SIGN, NGC, RNAO, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, CBM, and VIP from January 1, 2011 to February 25, 2020. Guidelines which met IOM criteria and were focused on clinical questions using qualitative research or qualitative evidence, were included. Four authors extracted significant information and entered this onto data extraction forms. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used to evaluate the guidelines’ quality. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 17.0 and R version 3.3.2. Results Sixty four guidelines were identified. The overall quality of the guidelines was high (almost over 60%). Domain 1 (Scope and Purpose) was ranked the highest with a median score of 83% (IQ 78–83). Domain 2 (Stakeholder involvement) and Domain 5 (Applicability) were ranked the lowest with median scores of 67% (IQ 67–78) and 67% (IQ 63–73) respectively. 20% guidelines used qualitative research to identify clinical questions. 86% guidelines used qualitative evidence to support recommendations (mainly based on primary studies, a few on qualitative evidence synthesis). 19% guidelines applied qualitative evidence when considering facilitators and barriers to recommendations’ implementation. 52% guideline developers evaluated the quality of the primary qualitative research study using the CASP tool or NICE checklist for qualitative studies. No guidelines evaluated the quality of qualitative evidence synthesis to formulate recommendations. 17% guidelines presented the level of qualitative research using the grade criteria of evidence and recommendation in different forms such as I, III, IV, very low. 28% guidelines described the grades of the recommendations supported by qualitative and quantitative evidence. No guidelines described the grade of recommendations only supported by qualitative evidence. Conclusions The majority of the included guidelines were high-quality. Qualitative evidence was mainly used to identify clinical questions, support recommendations, and consider facilitators and barriers to implementation of recommendations’. However, more attention needs to be paid to the methodology. For example, no experts proficient in qualitative research were involved in guideline development groups, no assessment of the quality of qualitative evidence synthesis was included and there was lack of details reported on the level of qualitative evidence or grade of recommendations.

health care sciences & services
Role of octreotide in the prevention of postoperative complications following pancreatic resection.

M. Büchler,H. Friess,I. Klempa,P. Hermanek,U. Sulkowski,H. Becker,A. Schafmayer,I. Baća,D. Lorenz,R. Meister,B. Kremer,Peter Wagner,Jens Witte,Ernst Ludwig Zurmayer,H. Saeger

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9610(92)90264-R

Abstract:
Methodological Quality of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Treatment Evidence-Based Guidelines: A Systematic Review Using the AGREE II and AGREE REX Tools

Ana Paula Oliveira Vilela,Flávia Deffert,Rosa Camila Lucchetta,Yara Maria da Silva Pires,Felipe Fernando Mainka,Fernanda S Tonin,Roberto Pontarolo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10557-024-07605-w

2024-07-09

Abstract:Purpose: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a progressive disease with a poor prognosis, and its management should be grounded in well-developed clinical practice guidelines (CPG). Thus, we critically assess the methodological quality of the available CPG for pharmacological treatments for PAH. Methods: A systematic review (CRD42023387168) was performed in PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Tripdatabase (Jan-2023). Eligible records were appraised by four reviewers using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research, and Evaluation Collaboration tool (AGREE II) and the complementary tool for assessing recommendations' quality and certainty, AGREE REX. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Results: Overall, 31 guidelines, mainly authored by professional societies (90%), targeting only physicians as primary users (84%), were identified. Guidelines presented a moderate overall quality (scores of 63% and 51% in AGREE II and AGREE REX, respectively), with a few domains showing slight improvements over the years. AGREE II "Scope and Purpose" (94%) and "Presentation Clarity" (99%) domains obtained the highest scores. The items related to "Stakeholder involvement," "Editorial independence," and "Clinical applicability" (AGREE REX) were fairly reported. Conversely, CPG lacks rigor in development (32% score, AGREE II), scarcely discusses the role of stakeholders, and provides deficient data on the implementation of recommendations (scores of 35% and 46% in AGREE II and AGREE REX, respectively). No differences in the quality of guidelines published by different developers or countries were observed (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Methodological weaknesses are common among guidelines addressing PAH treatment, especially regarding scientific rigor, stakeholders' values and preferences, and facilitators and barriers to implementability. Particular attention should be given to developing future guidelines.
Clinical practice guidelines for the management of hypertension in China

Chinese Society of Cardiology, Chinese Medical Association; Hypertension Committee of Cross-Straits Medicine Exchange Association; Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Rehabilitation Committee, Chinese Association of Rehabilitation Medicine

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000003431

2024-12-09

Abstract:In China, hypertension is the most common chronic non-communicable disease and the most significant risk factor for cardiovascular mortality among urban and rural residents. To standardize the clinical diagnosis and treatment of hypertension and to improve the prevention and control level of hypertension in China, Chinese Society of Cardiology, Chinese Medical Association; Hypertension Committee of Cross-Straits Medicine Exchange Association; Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Rehabilitation Committee, Chinese Association of Rehabilitation Medicine, jointly collaborated to formulate the Clinical Practice Guideline for Hypertension Management in China. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations, and the reporting items for practice guidelines in healthcare (RIGHT) were followed to establish the guidelines. Detailed evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of 44 clinical questions in the field of hypertension, including essential and secondary hypertension, have been provided to guide clinical practice. Registration: International Practice Guidelines Registry Platform, http://www.guidelines-registry.cn/, No. IPGRP-2021CN346.

Distribution and persistence of Legionella in water systems.

Quality of Critical Care Clinical Practice Guidelines: Assessment with AGREE II Instrument.

Appraising the quality of clinical practice guidelines in traditional Chinese medicine using AGREE II instrument: A systematic review

The Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines in China: a Systematic Assessment.

Quality problems in clinical practice guidelines and guideline appraisal studies: Should we tolerate or eradicate?

Analysis of the Status and Trends of Chinese Clinical Practice Guideline Development Between 2010 and 2020: A Systematic Review

Quality assessment of type 1 diabetes mellitus clinical practice guidelines

Quality appraisal of gestational diabetes mellitus guidelines with AGREE II: a systematic review

Using the RIGHT statement to evaluate the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines in traditional Chinese medicine

Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines for adult obstructive sleep apnea: A systematic review

Methodological and reporting quality of pediatric clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review

An Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: What Attitude Should We Have Towards the Guidelines?

Clinical practice guidelines of Chinese patent medicine in China: A critical review

Using AGREE II reporting checklist to evaluate the quality of Tuina clinical practice guidelines

An appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for constipation: a right attitude towards to guidelines

Quality of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Guidelines is Suboptimal: an Evaluation Using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument

Development and Preliminary Verification of the Evaluation System for Clinical Practice Guidelines in China

An exploration of how developers use qualitative evidence: content analysis and critical appraisal of guidelines

Role of octreotide in the prevention of postoperative complications following pancreatic resection.

Methodological Quality of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Treatment Evidence-Based Guidelines: A Systematic Review Using the AGREE II and AGREE REX Tools

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of hypertension in China