What to do with all the AGREEs? The AGREE portfolio of tools to support the guideline enterprise

Systematic review, methodological appraisal, and recommendation mapping of clinical practice guidelines for managing patients with Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis

PURPOSE

The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument (AGREE II) was developed to enhance the methodological rigor of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), aiming to generate trustworthy recommendations for various clinical scenarios. Despite its importance, there exists a gap in the quality of CPGs pertaining to Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (SJS-TEN). The aim of the study was to evaluate SJS-TEN CPGs to shed light on areas for enhancing SJS-TEN guidelines' quality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify SJS-TEN CPGs from January 2011 to December 2023 across bibliographic and guideline databases, as well as dermatology association websites. Four reviewers employed the AGREE II instrument to appraise the quality of eligible CPGs. Subsequently, AGREE II domain scores were calculated and their recommendations mapped.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Seven eligible SJS-TEN CPGs reviewed, originating from Europe, North America, Asia, and an authorship Group. The highest AGREE II domain scores were observed in scope and purpose (mean: 63%, standard deviation [SD]: 23.195%) and clarity of presentation (mean: 70%, SD: 14.5%). Conversely, the lowest score was noted in the applicability domain (mean: 28%, SD: 17.44%). Only two guidelines by the British Association of Dermatologists (28.6%) met the 'recommend' level. Recommendations from all CPGs were compared in tabular form.

Determining the methodological rigor and overall quality of out-of-hospital clinical practice guidelines: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Out-of-hospital clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) guide paramedics, emergency medical technicians and first responders, but their quality remains uncertain. This scoping review aims to identify, aggregate and describe all literature that has used a structured appraisal instrument to assess the methodological rigor and overall quality of out-of-hospital CPGs.

METHODS

This study was conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and involved systematically searching the following databases and/or information sources with no publication or language limit applied: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Elsevier), CINAHL with full text (EBSCO), Scopus (Elsevier), ProQuest Central (ProQuest).

RESULTS

This review identified 15 articles that appraised 311 unique out-of-hospital CPGs. These CPGs ranged in date of publication from 1998 to 2022. The majority of CPGs (267/311) were assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE-II) instrument, with 146 guidelines appraised against two tools. Following aggregation, CPGs scored highest in Domain 4 (clarity of presentation) at 77.7% (SD = 15.1%), and lowest in Domain 5 (applicability) at 42.6% (SD = 23.7%). The average Domain 3 score (rigor of development) was 55.6% (SD = 25.7%). Of CPGs appraised against the AGREE-II instrument, 34.4% met our a priori definition of being high-quality (Domain 3 score of equal to or greater than 75%), while 31.3% were deemed medium-quality (Domain 3 score between 74% and 50%), and 34.3% were considered low-quality (Domain 3 score less than 50%). There were no significant changes observed in the average Domain 3 score over time (p = 0.092). 146 CPGs were assessed against the National Academy of Medicine criteria with 34.9% meeting all elements indicative of being a high-quality guideline, while 39 CPGs were assessed the 2016 National Health and Medical Research Council Standards for Guidelines with 0% meeting all criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Out-of-hospital CPGs currently have poor methodological rigor and are of medium to low overall quality. These results should be used to inform future research and initiatives that aim to standardize the methods used to develop guidelines used in this healthcare setting.

Fostering Shared Decision-Making Between Patients and Health Care Professionals in Clinical Practice Guidelines: Protocol for a Project to Develop and Test a Tool for Guideline Developers

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are designed to assist health care professionals in medical decision-making, but they often lack effective integration of shared decision-making (SDM) principles to reflect patient values and preferences, particularly in the context of preference-sensitive CPG recommendations. To address this shortcoming and foster SDM through CPGs, the integration of patient decision aids (PDAs) into CPGs has been proposed as an important strategy. However, methods for systematically identifying and prioritizing CPG recommendations relevant to SDM and related decision support tools are currently lacking.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the project is to develop (1) a tool for systematically identifying and prioritizing CPG recommendations for which SDM is considered particularly relevant and (2) a platform for PDAs to support practical SDM implementation.

METHODS

The project consists of 6 work packages (WPs). It is embedded in the German health care context but has an international focus. In WP 1, we will conduct a scoping review in bibliographic databases and gray literature sources to identify methods used to foster SDM via PDAs in the context of CPGs. In WP 2, we will conduct semistructured interviews with CPG experts to better understand the concepts of preference sensitivity and identify strategies for fostering SDM through CPGs. WP 3, a modified Delphi study including surveys and focus groups with SDM experts, aims to define and operationalize preference sensitivity. Based on the results of the Delphi study, we will develop a methodology for prioritizing key questions in CPGs. In WP 4, the tool will be developed. A list of relevant items to identify CPG recommendations for which SDM is most relevant will be created, tested, and iteratively refined, accompanied by the development of a user manual. In WP 5, a platform for creating and digitizing German-language PDAs will be developed to support the practical application of SDM during clinical encounters. WP 6 will conclude the project by testing the tool with newly developed and revised CPGs.

RESULTS

The Brandenburg Medical School Ethics Committee approved the project (165122023-ANF). An international multidisciplinary advisory board is involved to guide the tool development on CPGs and SDM. Patient partners are involved throughout the project, considering the essential role of the patient perspective in SDM. As of February 20, 2024, we are currently assessing literature references to determine eligibility for inclusion in the scoping review (WP 1). We expect the project to be completed by December 31, 2026.

CONCLUSIONS

The tool will enable CPG developers to systematically incorporate aspects of SDM into CPG development, thereby providing guideline-based support for the patient-practitioner interaction. Together, the tool for CPGs and the platform for PDAs will create a systematic link between CPGs, SDM, and PDAs, which may facilitate SDM in clinical practice.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/57611.

Methodological quality and clinical recommendations of guidelines on the management of dyslipidaemias for cardiovascular disease risk reduction: a systematic review and an appraisal through AGREE II and AGREE REX tools

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are statements to assist practitioners and stakeholders in decisions about healthcare. Low methodological quality guidelines may prejudice decision-making and negatively affect clinical outcomes in non-communicable diseases, such as cardiovascular diseases worsted by poor lipid management. We appraised the quality of CPGs on dyslipidemia management and synthesized the most updated pharmacological recommendations.

METHODS

A systematic review following international recommendations was performed. Searches to retrieve CPG on pharmacological treatments in adults with dyslipidaemia were conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Trip databases. Eligible articles were assessed using AGREE II (methodological quality) and AGREE-REX (recommendation excellence) tools. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data. The most updated guidelines (published after 2019) had their recommendations qualitatively synthesized in an exploratory analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 66 guidelines authored by professional societies (75%) and targeting clinicians as primary users were selected. The AGREE II domains Scope and Purpose (89%) and Clarity of Presentation (97%), and the AGREE-REX item Clinical Applicability (77.0%) obtained the highest values. Conversely, guidelines were methodologically poorly performed/documented (46%) and scarcely provided data on the implementability of practical recommendations (38%). Recommendations on pharmacological treatments are overall similar, with slight differences concerning the use of supplements and the availability of drugs.

CONCLUSION

High-quality dyslipidaemia CPG, especially outside North America and Europe, and strictly addressing evidence synthesis, appraisal, and recommendations are needed, especially to guide primary care decisions. CPG developers should consider stakeholders' values and preferences and adapt existing statements to individual populations and healthcare systems to ensure successful implementation interventions.

GRADE guidance 39: using GRADE-ADOLOPMENT to adopt, adapt or create contextualized recommendations from source guidelines and evidence syntheses

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE)-ADOLOPMENT methodology has been widely used to adopt, adapt, or de novo develop recommendations from existing or new guideline and evidence synthesis efforts. The objective of this guidance is to refine the operationalization for applying GRADE-ADOLOPMENT.

METHODS

Through iterative discussions, online meetings, and email communications, the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT project group drafted the updated guidance. We then conducted a review of handbooks of guideline-producing organizations, and a scoping review of published and planned adolopment guideline projects. The lead authors refined the existing approach based on the scoping review findings and feedback from members of the GRADE working group. We presented the revised approach to the group in November 2022 (approximately 115 people), in May 2023 (approximately 100 people), and twice in September 2023 (approximately 60 and 90 people) for approval.

RESULTS

This GRADE guidance shows how to effectively and efficiently contextualize recommendations using the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach by doing the following: (1) showcasing alternative pathways for starting an adolopment effort; (2) elaborating on the different essential steps of this approach, such as building on existing evidence-to-decision (EtDs), when available or developing new EtDs, if necessary; and (3) providing examples from adolopment case studies to facilitate the application of the approach. We demonstrate how to use contextual evidence to make judgments about EtD criteria, and highlight the importance of making the resulting EtDs available to facilitate adolopment efforts by others.

CONCLUSION

This updated GRADE guidance further operationalizes the application of GRADE-ADOLOPMENT based on over 6 years of experience. It serves to support uptake and application by end users interested in contextualizing recommendations to a local setting or specific reality in a short period of time or with limited resources.

Adapting Evidence-Based Practice Guidelines for Emergency Management of Seizures in Children Beyond the Neonatal Period

BACKGROUND

The presented evidence-based clinical practice guideline (CPG) is proposed as a National CPG where we adapted the international recommendations for the emergency management of seizures in children beyond the neonatal period to suit the health care in Egypt. The quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations are indicated. This study aimed to standardize the treatment of acute epileptic seizures and to provide an easy-to-apply acute treatment protocol that will allow immediate and appropriate seizure control.

METHODS

This is part of a larger program by the Egyptian Pediatric Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee (EPG) in collaboration with the staff of pediatric departments of 15 Egyptian universities and the National Research Centre. EPG was affiliated later to the Supreme Council of the Egyptian University Hospitals aiming to define the topics of, assign authors to, and assist in the adaptation of pediatric evidence-based CPGs according to a national strategic plan (http://epg.edu.eg). The committee is guided by a formal CPG adaptation methodology: the "Adapted ADAPTE."

RESULTS

The Egyptian Childhood Seizure Group (ECSG) reviewed the results of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II assessment and decided to adapt the recommendations of three source CPGs: American Epilepsy Society, Italian League Against Epilepsy, Neurocritical Care Society, and Neurologic & Psychiatric Society of Zambia. Eight implementation tools were included. A comprehensive set of multifaceted CPG implementation strategies was provided for the clinicians, patients, nurses, and other relevant stakeholders contextualized to the national settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience with this adaptation methodology provides useful insight into its national utilization in Egypt.

Defining indicators for disease burden, health outcomes, policies and barriers and facilitators to health services for migrant populations in the Middle East and North African region: a protocol for a suite of systematic reviews

INTRODUCTION

The Middle East and North African (MENA) region is characterised by high and complex migration flows, yet little is known about the health of migrant populations, their levels of underimmunisation and access to healthcare provision. Data are needed to support regional elimination and control targets for key diseases and the design and delivery of programmes to improve health outcomes in these groups. This protocol describes a suite of seven systematic reviews that aim to identify, appraise and synthesise the available evidence on the burden and health outcomes, policies and access (barriers and facilitators) related to these mobile populations in the region.

METHODS

Seven systematic reviews will cover three questions to explore the: (1) burden and health outcomes, (2) policies and (3) healthcare barriers and facilitators for the following seven disease areas in migrants in the MENA region: tuberculosis, HIV and hepatitis B and C, malaria and neglected tropical diseases, diabetes, mental health, maternal and neonatal health, and vaccine-preventable diseases. We will search electronic databases for studies in any language (year 2000-2023), reference-check relevant publications and cross-check included studies with experts. We will search for grey literature by hand searching key databases and websites (including regional organisations and MoH websites) for country-specific guidelines and talking to our network of experts for local and regional reports and key datasets. We will assess the studies and policies for their quality using appropriate tools. We will meta-analyse the data by disease outcome if they are of sufficient volume and similarity. Where meta-analysis is not possible and where data are on policy or access, we will narratively synthesise the evidence using summary tables, figures and text.

DISSEMINATION

We anticipate disseminating the findings through peer-reviewed publications, conferences and other formats relevant to all stakeholders. We are following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and protocols will be registered on International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.

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

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.

Cervical length as a screening tool for preterm birth in twin pregnancies: a systematic review and critical evaluation of quality clinical practice guidelines

OBJECTIVES

Twin pregnancies are at increased risk of preterm birth (PTB) compared to singletons. Evaluation of cervical length (CL) represents the optimal tool to screen PTB in singleton. Conversely, there is less evidence on the use of CL in twins. Our aim was to evaluate the methodological quality and clinical heterogeneity of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on the CL application in twins using AGREE II methodology.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Scopus, and websites of the main scientific societies were examined. The following aspects were evaluated: diagnostic accuracy of CL, optimal gestational age at assessment and interventions in twin pregnancies with reduced CL. The quality of the published CPGs was carried out using "The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE II)" tool. The quality of guideline was rated using a scoring system. Each considered item was evaluated by the reviewers on a seven-point scale that ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). A cut-off >60 % identifies a CPGs as recommended.

RESULTS

The AGREE II standardized domain scores for the first overall assessment had a mean of 74 %. The score was more than 60 % in the 66.6 % of CPGs analyzed indicating an agreement between the reviewers on recommending the use of these CPGs. A significant heterogeneity was found; there was no specific recommendation on CL assessment in about half of the published CPGs. There was also significant heterogeneity on the CL cut-off to prompt intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the fact that the AGREE II analysis showed that the majority of the included guidelines are of good quality, there was a significant heterogeneity among CPGs as regard as the indication, timing, and cut-off of CL in twins as well as in the indication of interventions.

Current practice, guideline adherence, and barriers to implementation for Achilles tendinopathy rehabilitation: a survey of physical therapists and people with Achilles tendinopathy

Objective

To explore clinical practice patterns of physical therapists (PTs) who treat people with Achilles tendinopathy (AT), and identify perceived barriers and facilitators for prescribing and engaging with therapeutic exercise among PTs and people with AT.

Methods

Two cross-sectional surveys were electronically distributed between November 2021 and May 2022; one survey was designed for PTs while the second was for people with AT. Survey respondents answered questions regarding their physical therapy training and current practice (PTs), injury history and management (people with AT), and perceived barriers and facilitators (PTs and people with AT).

Results

341 PTs and 74 people with AT completed the surveys. In alignment with clinical practice guidelines, more than 94% of PTs surveyed (97% of whom had some form of advanced musculoskeletal training) prioritise patient education and therapeutic exercise. Patient compliance, patient knowledge, and the slow nature of recovery were barriers to prescribing therapeutic exercise reported by PTs, while time, physical resources, and a perceived lack of short-term treatment effectiveness were barriers for people with AT.

Conclusions

Consistent with clinical practice guidelines, PTs with advanced training reported prioritising therapeutic exercise and education for managing AT. However, both PTs and people with AT identified many barriers to prescribing or engaging with therapeutic exercise. By addressing misconceptions about the time burden and ineffectiveness of exercise, and by overcoming access issues to exercise space and equipment, PTs may be able to improve intervention adherence and subsequently outcomes for people with AT.

Diagnosis, Treatment, and Management for Chronic Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines and Consensus Statements

Objectives

Management of chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) encompasses a broad spectrum of practices, posing considerable complexity and variability. While guidelines have been established to augment the management quality of CCS, notable disparities persist across their recommendations. This study strives to scrutinize, compare, and reconcile these guideline recommendations pertaining to the diagnosis, treatment, and management of CCS patients. Our goal is to align these recommendations with contemporary clinical practices, thus laying a robust foundation for their pragmatic application in clinical settings.

Methods

A comprehensive systematic search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, China Science and Technology Journal Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System, Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database, and Chinese Biological Medicine Database. The timeframe for this search spanned from their inception up to May 30, 2022, aiming to collate all published guidelines relevant to CCS. Subsequently, two independent reviewers undertook the task of appraising the quality of these guidelines by utilizing the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument.

Results

The search yielded a total of 10,699 citations. Following a thorough evaluation, fourteen clinical practice guidelines and four consensus statements, each offering specific recommendations for CCS, were selected. The quality of these guidelines showcased a broad spectrum of variation. The domain of "presentation clarity" received the highest accolades, while "applicability" languished at the lower end of the scoring spectrum. On average, the guidelines attained a quality score denoting sufficiency. Furthermore, recommendations across different guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment, and management of CCS displayed a striking level of divergence.

Conclusion

The landscape of published CCS guidelines is marked by extensive variations in scope, quality, and recommendations. Hence, there is a compelling need for collaborative efforts amongst multidisciplinary professionals to forge comprehensive, higher-quality evidence-based guidelines; such a concerted approach is paramount to enhance treatment efficacy and health outcomes for patients grappling with CCS.

Assessing the quality and completeness of reporting in health systems guidance for pandemics using the AGREE-HS tool

Background

During health emergencies, leading healthcare organisations, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), the European Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (ECDC), and the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), provide guidance for public health response. Previous studies have evaluated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) produced in response to epidemics or pandemics, yet few have focused on public health guidelines and recommendations. To address this gap, we assessed health systems guidance (HSG) produced by the WHO, the ECDC, and the CDC for the 2009 H1N1 and COVID-19 pandemics.

Methods

We extracted HSG for the H1N1 and COVID-19 pandemics from the organisations' dedicated repositories and websites. After screening the retrieved documents for eligibility, five assessors evaluated them using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research & Evaluation - Health Systems (AGREE-HS) tool to assess the completeness and transparency of reporting according to the five AGREE-HS domains: "Topic", "Participants", "Methods", "Recommendations", and "Implementability".

Results

Following the screening process, we included 108 HSG in the analysis. We observed statistically significant differences between the H1N1 and COVID-19 pandemics, with HSG issued during COVID-19 receiving higher AGREE-HS scores. The HSG produced by the CDC had significantly lower overall scores and single-domain scores compared to the WHO and ECDC. However, all HSG scored relatively low, under the median of 40 total points (range = 10-70), indicating incomplete reporting. The HSG produced by all three organisations received a median score <4 (range = 1-7) for the "Participants", "Methods", and "Implementability" domains.

Conclusions

There is still significant progress to be made in the quality and completeness of reporting in HSG issued during pandemics, especially regarding methodological approaches and the composition of the guidance development team. Due to their significant impact and importance for healthcare systems globally, HSG issued during future healthcare crises should adhere to best reporting practices to increase uptake by stakeholders and ensure public trust in healthcare organisations.

A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Caries Prevention following the AGREE II Checklist

Untreated oral diseases are detrimental to overall well-being and quality of life and are in close relationship with social and economic consequences. The presence of strong evidence for caries primary and secondary prevention is a compulsory tool for the development of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). This paper was aimed to assess systematically the importance of clinical practice guidelines in caries prevention management considering both the adult and pediatric populations and evaluate them using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) Checklist. Records were extracted from EMBASE, SCOPUS, PubMed/Medline and seven other relevant guideline databases between 6 January and 14 February 2023. Two reviewers independently conducted the appraisal using the web-based platform My AGREE PLUS. Twenty-one guidelines/papers met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Eight CPGs included both primary and secondary prevention interventions, whereas thirteen presented a single preventive model. Overall, 12 guidelines were published in the USA. The mean AGREE II scores ranged from 35.4% to 84.3%. Of the total twenty-one included guidelines, twelve were classified as "Recommended", ranging from 56.3% to 84.3%, the others were described as "Recommended with modification", ranging from 35.4% to 68.9%. From the AGREE II analysis carried out, the CPGs included in this survey adopted a punctual methodological rigor but lacked applicative power. The present survey showed that the public, as the primary beneficiary, played a limited role in the development of the twenty-one CPGs. Hence, methodological improvement can better support high-quality CPG development in the future.

Adapted Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diagnosis and Treatment of Epilepsies in Children: A Tertiary Children's Hospital Update

HYPOTHESIS AND/OR BACKGROUND

We recently updated and merged the adapted clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the diagnosis and treatment of children with epilepsy of a tertiary-level hospital. Medical knowledge is always evolving. As a result, it is critical to revisit the clinical standards on a frequent basis to ensure that the best services are offered to the target receivers. The purpose of this article was to update and merge the CPGs at Alexandria University Children Hospital (AUCH) for the diagnosis (2014) and treatment (2016) of children with epilepsy to unify and standardize the practice for better care and outcome.

METHODS

This review and update CPG project was initiated by assembling a Guideline Review Group (GRG). The GRG conducted focus group discussions and decided to search any published updates of the recommendations of the previously identified high-quality and evidence-based CPG developed by the SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) and to merge the two previous local CPGs under one comprehensive CPG for full management of epilepsy in children. The high quality of the selected source CPG from SIGN was based on quality assessment of CPGs undertaken previously using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument. The GRG followed the Checklist for the Reporting of Updated Guidelines (CheckUp), which is the CPG tool recommended by the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of health Research Network for reporting of updated CPGs in addition to the RIGHT-Ad@pt Checklist for Adapted CPGs. The finalized updated CPG draft was sent to the external reviewer group topic experts.

RESULTS

The group updated 10 main categories of recommendations from one source CPG (SIGN). The recommendations included (1) epilepsy diagnosis; (2) recognition, identification, and referral; (3) pharmacological treatment of epilepsy and epilepsy syndromes; (4) nonpharmacological treatment of epilepsy and epilepsy syndromes; (5) managing pharmacoresistant epilepsy; (6) management of epilepsy in special groups; (7) medications; (8) children and caregiver education and support; (9) comorbidities and mortality; and (10) transitional care from pediatric to adult care services.

CONCLUSIONS

The finalized CPG provides evidence-based guidance to health care providers in AUCH for the diagnosis and management of epilepsy in children. The study also established the significance of a collaborative clinical and methodological expert group for the update of CPGs, as well as the usability of the "CheckUp" and "RIGHT-Ad@pt" CPG Tools.

Guidelines' recommendations for the treatment-resistant depression: A systematic review of their quality

INTRODUCTION

Depression is a serious and widespread mental health disorder. A significant proportion of patients with depression fail to remit after two antidepressant treatment trials, a condition named treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are instruments aimed to improve diagnosis and treatment. This study objective is to systematically appraise the quality and elaborate a comparison of high-quality CPGs with high-quality recommendations aimed at TRD.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We searched several specialized databases and organizations that develop CPGs. Independent researchers assessed the quality of the CPGs and their recommendations using AGREE II and AGREE-REX instruments, respectively. We selected only high-quality CPGs that included definition and recommendations for TRD. We investigated their divergencies and convergencies as well as weak and strong points.

RESULTS

Among seven high-quality CPGs with high-quality recommendations only two (Germany's Nationale Versorgungs Leitlinie-NVL and US Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense-VA/DoD) included specific TRD definition and were selected. We found no convergent therapeutic strategy among these two CPGs. Electroconvulsive therapy is recommended by the NVL but not by the VA/DoD, while repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is recommended by the VA/DoD but not by the NVL. While the NVL recommends the use of lithium, and a non-routine use of thyroid or other hormones, psychostimulants, and dopaminergic agents the VA/DoD does not even include these drugs among augmentation strategies. Instead, the VA/DoD recommends ketamine or esketamine as augmentation strategies, while the NVL does not mention these drugs. Other differences between these CPGs include antidepressant combination, psychotherapy as a therapeutic augmentation, and evaluation of the need for hospitalization all of which are only recommended by the NVL.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality CPGs for the treatment of depression diverge regarding the definition and use of the term TRD. There is also no convergent approach to TRD from currently high-quality CPGs.

Clinical practice guidelines for neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy: A systematic review using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation (AGREE) II instrument

Background and Objective

To systematically review, critically appraise the quality of recent clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for neonatal hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE), and map their recommendations.

Data Sources

CPG databases (GIN, ECRI, NICE, SIGN, DynaMed), Bibliographic databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL), and related specialized professional societies (e.g., AAP, CPS, BAPM, RCPCH, and SNS).

Study Selection

Original de-novo developed evidence-based CPGs for HIE, group authorship, Arabic or English languages, and international or national scope. The systematic review was drafted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and Johnston et al methodological guide.

Data Extraction

Quality assessment of the included HIE CPGs by the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation II (AGREE II) Instrument and report their characteristics, AGREE II ratings, and recommendations.

Data Synthesis

Our search retrieved 2,489 citations, of which two recent HIE CPGs were eligible and appraised: Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS) and Queensland Maternity and Neonatal Services (QMN). The overall assessment of the QMN CPG was superior (83%). Domain 1 (Scope & Purpose) scored (47%, 63%), Domain 2 (Stakeholder Involvement) (72%, 39%), Domain 3 (Rigour of Development) (48%, 43%), Domain 4 (Clarity & Presentation) (100%, 96%), Domain 5 (Applicability) (59%, 9%), and Domain 6 (Editorial Independence) (67%, 17%) for the QMN and CPS CPGs respectively. All appraisers recommended the QMN CPG for use in practice.

Conclusion

The methodological quality of the QMN CPG was superior with the relevant recommendations for its use in neonatal practice.

Limitations

limited to Arabic and English languages.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=258291, identifier: CRD42021258291.

Management of biologics in pregnant, lactating patients with inflammatory bowel disease and the impact on neonatal vaccination: A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The management of biological agents during pregnancy poses challenges as maternal and infant safety must be addressed. This study aims to compare the recommendations of existing guidelines on managing the use of biologics during pregnancy, lactation for patients with inflammatory bowel disease, and the influence on neonatal vaccination.

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang database, China Science and Technology Journal Database and China Biomedical Database were systematically searched from the inception date to 11 May 2022, to screen all relevant guidelines. Quality assessment was performed using the guideline methodology reporting tool AGREE II.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Fourteen guidelines and consensus statements with detailed recommendations were included. All guidance documents cover management comments during pregnancy, and most consider that biologics can be given safely during pregnancy but require suspension at the right time to protect the foetus. However, the roles of vedolizumab and ustekinumab are disputed. Five documents guide lactation and the use of most biologics during lactation is safe, but no guidelines recommend vedolizumab. Six papers provide recommendations for newborns' vaccination, suggesting a delay in infants' live vaccination schedule if their mothers are treated with biologics.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Our study concluded that future guidelines could consider incorporating newer, more robust evidence to update recommendations. The development of future guidelines needs to consider the involvement of multidisciplinary experts, adequately report on the evidence retrieval process, and provide strategies for implementation. Besides, more research is needed to explore the use of biologics during pregnancy and lactation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

Quality assessment of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) for the diagnosis and treatment of inflammatory bowel disease using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The incidence and diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has increased considerably in recent years. Many clinical practice guidelines (CPG) have been developed for the management of this disease across different clinical contexts, however, little evidence exists on their methodological quality. Therefore, we aimed to systematically evaluate the quality of CPGs for the diagnosis and treatment of IBD using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument.

METHODS

We identified CPGs by searching databases (MEDLINE - PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS) and other sources of gray literature on January 2022. We included guidelines with specific recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of IBD and evaluated them with the AGREE II instrument to assess their methodological quality. Six independent reviewers assessed the quality of the guidelines and resolved conflicts by consensus. We assessed the degree of agreement using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and change in quality over time was appraised in two periods: from 2012 to 2017 and from 2018 to 2022.

RESULTS

We analyzed and evaluated 26 CPGs that met the inclusion criteria. The overall agreement among reviewers was moderate (ICC: 0.74; 95% CI 0.36 - 0.89). The mean scores of the AGREE II domains were: "Scope and purpose" 84.51%, "Stakeholder involvement" 60.90%, "Rigor of development" 69.95%, "Clarity of presentation" 85.58%, "Applicability" 26.60%, and "Editorial independence" 62.02%. No changes in quality were found over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of the CPGs evaluated was generally good, with a large majority of the assessed guidelines being "recommended" and "recommended with modifications"; despite this, there is still room for improvement, especially in terms of stakeholder involvement and applicability. Efforts to develop high quality CPGs for IBD need to be further optimized.

Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines for neonatal sepsis using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II Instrument: A systematic review of neonatal guidelines

Background and objective

Neonatal sepsis (NS) continues to be a critical healthcare priority for the coming decades worldwide. The aim of this study was to critically appraise the quality of recent clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for neonatal sepsis and to summarize and compare their recommendations.

Methods

This study involves a systematic review of CPGs. We identified clinical questions and eligibility criteria and searched and screened for CPGs using bibliographic and CPG databases and professional societies. Each included CPG was assessed by four independent appraisers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. We summarized the recommendations in a comparison practical table. The systematic review was drafted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Its protocol was registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42021258732).

Results

Our search retrieved 4,432 citations; of which five CPGs were eligible and appraised: American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP 2018) (35 and 34 weeks); Canadian Pediatric Society (CPS 2017); National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE 2021); and Queensland Maternity and Neonatal Services (QH 2020). Among these, the overall assessment of two evidence-based CPGs scored > 70% (NICE and QH), which was consistent with their higher scores in the six domains of the AGREE II instrument. In domain 3 (rigor of development), NICE and QH scored 99 and 60%, respectively. In domain 5 (applicability), they scored 96 and 74%, respectively, and in domain 6 (editorial independence), they scored 90 and 71%, respectively.

Conclusion

The methodological quality of the NICE CPG was superior followed by the QH CPG with relevant recommendations for use in practice.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021258732, PROSPERO (CRD42021258732).

AGREEing on Clinical Practice Guidelines for Autism Spectrum Disorders in Children: A Systematic Review and Quality Assessment

BACKGROUND

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a multifaceted neurodevelopmental disorder requiring multimodal intervention and an army of multidisciplinary teams for a proper rehabilitation plan. Accordingly, multiple practice guidelines have been published for different disciplines. However, systematic evidence to detect and intervene must be updated regularly. Our main objective is to compare and summarize the recommendations made in the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for ASD in children released from November 2015 to March 2022.

METHODS

CPGs were subjected to a systematic review. We developed the inclusion and exclusion criteria and health-related questions, then searched and screened for CPGs utilizing bibliographic and CPG databases. Each of the CPGs used in the study were critically evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. In a realistic comparison table, we summarized the recommendations.

RESULTS

Four eligible CPGs were appraised: Australian Autism CRC (ACRC); Ministry of Health New Zealand (NZ); National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, Healthcare Improvement Scotland (SIGN-HIS). The overall assessments of all four CPGs scored greater than 80%; these findings were consistent with the high scores in the six domains of AGREE II, including: (1) scope and purpose, (2) stakeholder involvement, (3) rigor of development, (4) clarity of presentation, (5) applicability, and (6) editorial independence domains. Domain (3) scored 84%, 93%, 86%, and 85%; domain (5) 92%, 89%, 54%, and 85%; and domain (6) 92%, 96%, 88%, and 92% for ACRC, NICE, NZ, and SIGN-HIS, respectively. Overall, there were no serious conflicts between the clinical recommendations of the four CPGs, but some were more comprehensive and elaborative than others.

CONCLUSIONS

All four assessed evidence-based CPGs demonstrated high methodological quality and relevance for use in practice.

Trauma in pregnancy clinical practice guidelines: systematic review

PURPOSE

To objectively evaluate the methodological quality and clinical heterogeneity robustness of the published clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on the management of trauma in pregnancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Pubmed, Google Scholar, UpToDate, and Scopus Database were searched. The risk of bias and quality assessment of the included CPGs were performed using "The Appraisal Of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II)" tool. The following points relating to the management of trauma during pregnancy were addressed: quality of evidence assessment, classification of recommendations, main causes of trauma in pregnancy, importance of correct use of seat belts, ultrasound scans and/or pregnancy test in every female of reproductive age, description of physiological changes in pregnancy, classification in primary and secondary survey, primary survey based on ABCD Approach, fetus viable based on the weeks, radiographic studies for maternal evaluation, duration of fetal monitoring, use of anti-D immunoglobulin in rhesus-D-negative pregnant trauma patients, description of dose of RhD-Ig, the way to define gestational age if it was undetermined, descriptions of obstetrical complications, use of tetanus vaccination, and timing to perimortem cesarean section (CS).

RESULTS

Six CPGs were included. Quality of evidence assessment was described in 16.7% of CPGs (1/6), while it was not reported in 83.3% (5/6). Classification of recommendations was reported in 50% (3/3) of the CPGs. Motor vehicle crash was reported as the main cause of trauma in pregnancy in all the CPGs included in the present review, despite that the importance of a correct use of seat belts was described only in the 50% (3/6). Definition of fetal viability was also different among the included CPGs; in 50% (3/6) defined a fetus viable when it from 23 weeks, 33.3% (2/6) from 24 weeks, and 16.7% (1/6) from 20 weeks of gestation. Regarding the type of fetal monitoring, 33.3% (2/6) CPGs recommended CTG assessment at least every 4 h, 16.7% (1/6) at least every 6 h, 33.3% for 24 h if there are not reassuring signs and 16.7% (1/6) did not specify the duration of monitoring. Recommendations about the use of anti-D-immunoglobulin in rhesus-D-negative pregnant were also heterogeneous: 50% (3/6) of the CPGs suggested administration in all rhesus-D-negative pregnant women, 16.7% (1/6) only according to gestational age at trauma or in case of significant abdominal trauma, and 16.7% (1/6) only in case of positive Kleihauer test while 16.7% (1/6) did not specify it. Administration of tetanus vaccination was suggested in in 33.3% (2/6) of CPGs. Finally, there were different descriptions of timing to perimortem CS: 33.3% (2/6) of CPGs claims to do CS no later than 4 min, 50% (3/6) no later than 5 min, and 16.7% (1/6) does not describe timing for CS. The AGREE II standardized domain scores for the first overall assessment (OA1) had a mean of 69%. Only three CPGs scored more than 60% and revealed a consensus agreement between the reviewers on recommending the use of these CPGs.

CONCLUSION

There is clinical heterogeneity in some of the most relevant aspects of the management of pregnant women with trauma. The findings from this systematic review highlight the need for up to date and shared guidelines promoted by the main body societies in order make management of pregnant women with trauma homogenous.

The International Guideline Evaluation Screening Tool (IGEST): development and validation

Background

Guideline adaptation provides an important alternative to de novo guideline development by making the process more efficient and reducing unnecessary duplication. The quality evaluation of international guidelines is an essential part of the adaptation process.

The study aims at describing the development and validation of a new tool to screen trustworthy Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) for their adoption/adaption: the International Guideline Evaluation Screening Tool (IGEST).

Methods

The process of developing the IGEST involved two main phases: 1) tool development and 2) content validation. The tool development phase comprised three stages, where the scope of the IGEST was defined and the item pool was generated and refined. The content validation was performed through the computation of a content validity index (CVI) based on the opinions of an expert panel.

Results

All the items obtained a CVI >0.78, which resulted in the validation of the instrument. The final instrument comprised four preliminary conditions and 12 criteria organised into three dimensions: (i) the management of conflict of interest; (ii) the quality of evidence and the coherence between evidence and recommendations; and (iii) the panel composition.

Conclusion

The IGEST showed good content validity for assessing the quality of international guidelines. Using the new tool to select trustworthy guidelines might increase the likelihood that international clinical practice guidelines will be adopted/adapted to the local context by allowing a quick screening of existing guidelines trustworthiness and providing an acceptability threshold that supports the decision-making process.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01618-5.

Recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of treatment-resistant depression: A systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Depression is a serious and widespread mental health disorder. Although effective treatment does exist, a significant proportion of patients with depression fail to respond to antidepressant treatment trials, a condition named treatment-resistant depression. Efficient approach should be given this condition in order to revert the burden caused by depression. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are evidence-based health promotion instruments to improve diagnosis and treatment. CPGs recommendations for treatment-resistant depression must be trustworthy. The objective of the proposed study is to systematically identify, appraise the quality of CPGs for the treatment of depression and elaborate a synthesis of recommendations for treatment-resistant depression of CPGs considered to be of high quality and with high quality recommendations.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search the databases of organizations, such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, and the Virtual Health Library, and organizations that develop CPGs. Three independent researchers will assess the quality of the CPGs and their recommendations using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX instruments, respectively. Given the identification of divergences and convergences as well as weak and strong points among high quality CPGs, our work may help developers, clinicians and eventually patients.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethical approval is required for a systematic review, as no patient data will be used. The research results will be disseminated in conferences and submitted to a peer reviewed journal.

Quality of clinical practice guidelines for gestational and congenital toxoplasmosis: A systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the methodological quality and transparency of the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of gestational and congenital toxoplasmosis (CT).

METHODS

Systematic review of the literature on gestational and CT CPGs conducted in the MEDLINE, Embase, TripDatabase, Biblioteca Virtual en Salud databases and extensive manual searches in 19 CPG repositories. The characteristics of each of the guidelines were extracted using My AGREE PLUS on-line. Three reviewers assessed overall quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool.

RESULTS

The combined systematic review found 8651 citations. Of them 46 full texts were reviewed, and eight documents were finally included: four toxoplasmosis CPGs, three prenatal care CPGs that included recommendations on toxoplasmosis, and one pregnancy infection guideline that also included recommendations on toxoplasmosis. The AGREE II domains found to have the highest scores were 'clarity of presentation' (85%; [37%-100%]), followed by 'scope and purpose' (73%; [33%-98%]), and 'editorial independence' (51%; [3%-94%]); the domains with the lowest scores were 'rigour of development' (36%; [11%-79%]), 'stakeholder involvement' (34%; [24%-85%]), and 'applicability' (17%; [6%-83%]). The Colombian and Spanish-Agencia de Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias de Andalucía (AETSA) CPGs had the highest global AGREE II scores. Absolute interrater agreement was good to excellent.

CONCLUSION

Substantial quality variation was found among CPGs, which provided recommendations in accordance with the context of the disease in the corresponding country or region. Only two of the CPGs appraised obtained a good score and are classified as 'recommended'.

International alliance and AGREE-ment of 71 clinical practice guidelines on the management of critical care patients with COVID-19: a living systematic review

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to systematically identify and critically assess the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19 with the AGREE II instrument.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We searched Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, CNKI, CBM, WanFang, and grey literature from November 2019 - November 2020. We did not apply language restrictions. One reviewer independently screened the retrieved titles and abstracts, and a second reviewer confirmed the decisions. Full texts were assessed independently and in duplicate. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. We included any guideline that provided recommendations on the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19. Data extraction was performed independently and in duplicate by two reviewers. We descriptively summarized CPGs characteristics. We assessed the quality with the AGREE II instrument and we summarized relevant therapeutic interventions.

RESULTS

We retrieved 3,907 records and 71 CPGs were included. Means (Standard Deviations) of the scores for the 6 domains of the AGREE II instrument were 65%(SD19.56%), 39%(SD19.64%), 27%(SD19.48%), 70%(SD15.74%), 26%(SD18.49%), 42%(SD34.91) for the scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, editorial independence domains, respectively. Most of the CPGs showed a low overall quality (less than 40%).

CONCLUSION

Future CPGs for COVID-19 need to rely, for their development, on standard evidence-based methods and tools.

A Canadian model for providing high-quality, timely and relevant evidence to meet health system decision-maker needs: the SPOR Evidence Alliance

Canada has made great progress in synthesizing, disseminating, and integrating research findings into health systems and clinical decision-making; yet gaps exist in the research-to-practice continuum. The Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) Evidence Alliance aims to help close gaps by providing decision-makers with evidence that is timely, context sensitive, and demand driven to better inform patient-oriented practices and policies in health systems. In this article, we introduce a model established in Canada to support decision-maker needs for high-quality evidence that is patient oriented to enhance health systems performance. We provide an overview of how this model was implemented, who is involved, who it serves, as well as its organizational structure and remit. We discuss key milestones achieved to date and the impact this initiative has made within the health research community. The strength of the SPOR Evidence Alliance lies in its unique ability to simultaneously: ( i) serve as a national platform for researchers to stay connected and collaborate to minimize duplication of efforts and ( ii) facilitate access to research knowledge for patient partners and decision-makers. In doing so, the SPOR Evidence Alliance is supporting health policy and practice decisions that support and strengthen Canada’s dynamic health systems.

Adherence of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pharmacologic Treatments of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 to Trustworthy Standards: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

The COVID-19 pandemic created the need for rapid and urgent guidance for clinicians to manage COVID-19 among patients and prevent transmission.

OBJECTIVE

To appraise the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) using the National Academy of Medicine (NAM) criteria.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to December 14, 2020, and a search of related articles to February 28, 2021, that included CPGs developed by societies or by government or nongovernment organizations that reported pharmacologic treatments of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Teams of 2 reviewers independently abstracted data and assessed CPG quality using the 15-item National Guideline Clearinghouse Extent of Adherence to Trustworthy Standards (NEATS) instrument.

FINDINGS

Thirty-two CPGs were included in the review. Of these, 25 (78.1%) were developed by professional societies and emanated from a single World Health Organization (WHO) region. Overall, the CPGs were of low quality. Only 7 CPGs (21.9%) reported funding sources, and 12 (37.5%) reported conflicts of interest. Only 5 CPGs (15.6%) included a methodologist, described a search strategy or study selection process, or synthesized the evidence. Although 14 CPGs (43.8%) made recommendations or suggestions for or against treatments, they infrequently rated confidence in the quality of the evidence (6 of 32 [18.8%]), described potential benefits and harms (6 of 32 [18.8%]), or graded the strength of the recommendations (5 of 32 [15.6%]). External review, patient or public perspectives, or a process for updating were rare. High-quality CPGs included a methodologist and multidisciplinary collaborations involving investigators from 2 or more WHO regions.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this review, few COVID-19 CPGs met NAM standards for trustworthy guidelines. Approaches that prioritize engagement of a methodologist and multidisciplinary collaborators from at least 2 WHO regions may lead to the production of fewer, high-quality CPGs that are poised for updates as new evidence emerges.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42021245239.

Diagnosis and Treatment for Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines and Consensus Statements

Background: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is an important stage between the normal cognitive decline of aging and dementia. The aim of this study was to compare and harmonize the recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of MCI based on current clinical practice guidelines. Methods: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database, Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database, and Chinese Biological Medicine Database from their inception date to April 24, 2021 to identify all published guidelines on MCI. The qualities of the eligible guidelines were appraised by two reviewers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. Results: Thirteen guidance documents (four guidelines and nine consensus statements) with specific recommendations were included. Nine guidelines and consensus statements covered the screening and diagnosis of MCI. The evaluation of the documents showed that neuropsychological testing and biomarker assessments were the most common recommendations for the diagnosis of MCI. Nine of the 13 guidance documents covered the treatment and management of MCI. The recommendations for the treatment and management were classified into four categories, namely: intervention for risk reduction, pharmacologic interventions, non-pharmacologic interventions, and counseling. Regarding pharmacological interventions, three guidelines recommend no pharmacologic intervention. The use of cholinesterase inhibitors for MCI is contraindicated in three guidance documents, whereas one proposes that cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine should be deprescribed. EHb761^®, Chinese herbal decoctions, and Chinese traditional patent medicine are recommended in two documents. A total of seven guidance documents recommend non-pharmacological interventions, including physical activity interventions, cognitive interventions, dietary and nutritional interventions, and acupuncture. Conclusion: An updated search for possible evidence on the diagnosis and treatment of MCI is needed. Potentially effective diagnoses and treatments, either conventional or complementary, and alternative therapies should be highly valued and addressed in correlation with the supporting evidence.

A protocol for a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for the antenatal management of dichorionic diamniotic twin pregnancy

Overview: The protocol outlines the process designed to systematically review clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), addressing the antenatal management of dichorionic diamniotic (DCDA) twin pregnancies. Background: CPGs are statements that include recommendations intended to optimise patient care, that are informed by a systematic review of evidence and an assessment of the benefits and harms of alternative care options. CPGs are typically created by scientific institutes, organisations and professional societies, and high-quality CPGs are fundamental to improve patient outcomes, standardise clinical practice and improve the quality of care. While CPGs are designed to improve the quality of care, to achieve this, the identification and appraisal of current international CPGs is required. Because twin pregnancies are identified as high-risk pregnancies, a systematic review of the CPGs in this field is a useful first step for establishing the required high level of care. Aim: The aim of the systematic review is to identify, appraise and examine published CPGs for the antenatal management of DCDA twin pregnancies, within high-income countries. Methods: We will identify published CPGs addressing any aspect of antenatal management of care in DCDA twin pregnancies, appraise the quality of the identified CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation version 2 (AGREE II) the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation - Recommendations excellence (AGREE-REX) instruments and examining the recommendations from the identified CPGs. Ultimately, this protocol aspires to clearly define the process for a reproducible systematic review of CPGs within a high-income country, addressing any aspect of antenatal management of DCDA twin pregnancies. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021248586 (24/06/2021).

Systematic review of diabetic eye disease practice guidelines: more applicability, transparency and development rigor are needed

OBJECTIVES

To assess the quality of diabetic eye disease clinical practice guidelines.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A systematic search of diabetic eye disease guidelines was conducted on six online databases and guideline repositories. Four reviewers independently rated quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research, and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. Aggregate scores (%) for six domains and overall quality assessment were calculated. A "good quality" guideline was one with ≥60% score for "rigor of development" and in at least two other domains.

RESULTS

Eighteen guidelines met the inclusion criteria, of which 13 were evidence-based guidelines (involved systematic search and grading of evidence). The median scores (interquartile range (IQR)) for "scope and purpose," "stakeholder involvement," "rigor of development," "clarity of presentation," "applicability" and "editorial independence" were 73.6% (54.2%-80.6%), 48.6% (29.2%-71.5%), 60.2% (30.9%-78.1%), 86.6% (76.7%-94.4%), 28.6% (18.0%-37.8%) and 60.2% (30.9%-78.1%), respectively. The median overall score (out of 7) of all guidelines was 5.1 (IQR: 3.7-5.8). Evidence-based guidelines scored significantly higher compared to expert-consensus guidelines. Half (n = 9) of the guidelines (all evidence-based) were of "good quality."

CONCLUSION

A wide variation in methodological quality exists among diabetic eyecare guidelines, with nine demonstrating "good quality." Future iterations of guidelines could improve by appropriately engaging stakeholders, following a rigorous development process, including support for application in clinical practice and ensuring editorial transparency.

Quality appraisal of existing guidelines for the management of headache disorders by the AGREE II's method

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the quality of existing clinical practice guidelines for headache management and their main recommendations.

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines have been developed to support the clinical decision-making. However, to achieve this goal, the quality of these guidelines must be ensured.

METHODS

A systematic search for clinical practice guidelines for headache management was conducted in the PubMed database, in websites of known guideline developers and in websites of known headache associations. The quality appraisal was performed through the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II method.

RESULTS

Twelve guidelines were evaluated. The domains of rigor of development, applicability, and editorial independence, which most influence the overall quality of guidelines, had the lowest average scores and the highest standard deviation rates (61% ± 23; 37% ± 20; 53% ± 31). The main recommendations regarding medication use for acute treatment of episodic tension-type headache and migraine in adult patients consisted of paracetamol, acetylsalicylic acid, and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in all guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The statistical results indicate that the appraised guidelines have room for both individual and collective improvement. In addition, there is a well-established medication recommendation pattern among all guidelines evaluated.

Consideration of antimicrobial resistance and contextual factors in infectious disease guidelines: a systematic survey

OBJECTIVES

Guidelines that include antimicrobial recommendations should explicitly consider contextual factors that influence antimicrobial resistance and their downstream effects on resistance selection. The objectives were to analyse (1) how, and to what extent, tuberculosis, gonorrhoea and respiratory tract infection guidelines are considering antimicrobial resistance; (2) are of acceptable quality and (3) if they can be easily contextualised to fit the needs of specific populations and health systems.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and searched Ovid MEDLINE and Embase from 1 January 2007 to 7 June 2019 for tuberculosis, gonorrhoea and respiratory tract infection guidelines published in English. We also searched guideline databases, key websites and reference lists. We identified guidelines and recommendations that considered contextual factors including antimicrobial resistance, values, resource use, equity, acceptability and feasibility. We assessed quality of the guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool focusing on the domains scope and purpose, rigour of development, and editorial independence.

RESULTS

We screened 10 365 records, of which 74 guidelines met inclusion criteria. Of these guidelines, 39% (n=29/74) met acceptable quality scores. Approximately two-thirds of recommendations considered antimicrobial resistance at the population and/or outcome level. Five of the 29 guidelines reported all factors required for recommendation contextualisation. Equity was the least considered across guidelines.

DISCUSSION

Relatively few guidelines for highly prevalent infectious diseases are considering resistance at a local level, and many do not consider contextual factors necessary for appropriate antimicrobial use. Improving the quality of guidelines targeting specific regional areas is required.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020145235.

AGREEing on clinical practice guidelines for idiopathic steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome in children

BACKGROUND

Nephrotic syndrome is the most common kidney disease in children worldwide. Our aim was to critically appraise the quality of recent Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) for idiopathic steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome (SSNS) in children in addition to summarize and compare their recommendations.

METHODS

Systematic review of CPGs. We identified clinical questions and eligibility criteria and searched and screened for CPGs using bibliographic and CPG databases. Each included CPG was assessed by four independent appraisers using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation II (AGREE-II) instrument. We summarized the recommendations in a comparison practical table.

RESULTS

Our search retrieved 282 citations, of which three CPGs were eligible and appraised: Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2012, Japan Society for Pediatric Nephrology (JSPN) 2014, and American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) 2009. Among these, the overall assessment of two evidence-based CPGs scored > 70% (KDIGO and JSPN), which was consistent with their higher scores in the six domains of the AGREE II Instrument. In domain 3 (rigor of development), KDIGO, JSPN, and AAP scored 84%, 74%, and 41%, respectively. In domain 5 (applicability), they scored 22%, 16%, and 19%, respectively, and in domain 6 (editorial independence), they scored 94%, 65%, and 88%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The methodological quality of the KDIGO CPG was superior, followed by JSPN and AAP CPGs with the relevant recommendations for use in practice.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

The protocol was registered in the Center for Open Science (OSF) DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/6QTMD and in the International prospective register of systematic reviews PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020197511 .

Quality of the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council's clinical practice guidelines for the management of diabetic retinopathy

Clinical relevance: Understanding the quality of the commonly used clinical practice guidelines can help busy clinicians in selecting appropriate guidelines for evidence-based eye care for people with diabetes.Background: The National Health and Medical Research Council's (NHMRC) clinical practice guideline on diabetic retinopathy management has been widely used locally and internationally for over 10 years. However, the quality of this guideline has never been formally assessed. This study aimed to systematically evaluate the quality of the NHMRC guideline and compare it against other international guidelines.Methods: The 2008 NHMRC and another five established diabetic retinopathy management international guidelines (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, 2017; American Academy of Ophthalmology, 2019; American Optometric Association, 2019; Royal College of Ophthalmologists, UK, 2013, and Canadian Ophthalmologic Society, 2012) were examined using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. Scoring by four independent reviewers was aggregated into six domain and overall rating scores. Consistency among the reviewers was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).Results: The AGREE II domain scores for the NHMRC guideline were: scope and purpose 72%, stakeholder involvement 64%, rigour of development 77%, clarity of presentation 96%, applicability 35%, and editorial independence 15%. The NHMRC guideline's overall score (5.3 of 7) was lower than that of most other guidelines. Compared to others, the NHMRC guideline scored well in clarity of presentation and rigour of development, but less well for editorial independence. The NHMRC guideline was the least current and a need to update it was recognised by all reviewers who identified key areas for improvement.Conclusion: The quality of the NHMRC guideline was comparable to most other established international guidelines. Several areas of strengths and weaknesses in this guideline were identified. Future updates should aim to improve transparency in development and applicability in clinical practice.

Quality of evidence-based guidelines for platelet transfusion and use: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for platelet (PLT) transfusion are an important source of information for clinicians. Although guidelines intend to increase consistency and quality of care, variation in methodology and recommendations may exist that could impact the value of a guideline. We aimed to determine the quality of existing PLT transfusion guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument and to describe the inconsistencies in recommendations.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken for evidence-based guidelines from January 1, 2013, to January 25, 2019. Citations were reviewed in duplicate for inclusion and descriptive data extracted. Four physicians appraised the guideline using the AGREE II instrument and the scaled score for each item evaluated was calculated. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO.

RESULTS

Of 6744 citations, 6740 records were screened. Seven of 28 full-text studies met the inclusion criteria. The median scaled score (and the interquartile range of the scaled score) for the following items were as follows: scope and purpose, 94% (8%); stakeholder involvement, 63% (18%); rigor of development, 83% (14%); clarity of presentation, 94% (6%); applicability, 58% (20%); and editorial independence, 77% (4%). Overall quality ranged from 4 to 7 (7 is the maximum score). Inconsistent recommendations were on prophylactic PLT transfusion in hypoproliferative thrombocytopenia in the presence of risk factors and dose recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Inconsistencies between guidelines and variable quality highlight areas for future guideline writers to address. Areas of specific attention include issues of stakeholder involvement and applicability.

Quality of 2019 American optometric association clinical practice guideline for diabetic eye care

PURPOSE

The 2019 American Optometric Association (AOA) clinical practice guideline intends to assist optometrists in providing evidence-based eye care for people with diabetes. This technical report evaluated the methodological and reporting quality of the guideline.

METHODS

Four independent reviewers appraised the 2014 and 2019 versions of the AOA's guideline using the AGREE II instrument. Average scaled scores across the six domains of the AGREE II and an overall independent score were calculated based on the formula provided.

RESULTS

The 2019 guideline scored high (range: 75-93%) in all domains except for the domain of applicability (34%). In the domain of rigour of development, significant improvements were noted in the 2019 guideline (median score: 7.0, interquartile range (IQR): 6.0-7.0) compared to the 2014 guideline (median: 5.0, IQR: 4.0-6.0) (p < 0.0001). The appraisal of the guideline also identified room for further improvements, especially in relation to implementing the guideline.

CONCLUSION

The overall and domain specific quality of the AOA 2019 guideline was high, however, improvement in its applicability domain is required. The findings of this study will aid uptake of the guideline and inform improvement efforts for other international optometric guidelines.