ObjectiveTo evaluate the quality of pancreatic cancer guidelines using evidence-based methods based on the global burden of pancreatic cancer, so as to explore its status, region distribution, characteristics of coverage themes, and difference of therapies recommended by the guidelines of various quality, and to provide references for clinical decisionmaking. MethodsPubMed, The Cochrane Library (Issue 11, 2013), CBM, CNKI, and VIP, as well as the website of National Guidelines Clearinghouse (NGC), Guidelines International Network (GIN), and National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) were systematically searched for pancreatic cancer treatment guidelines. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE Ⅲ) was applied to assess methodological quality of included guidelines. ResultsA total of 14 relevant guidelines (including five evidence-based guidelines) were included involving seven countries of four continents (Asia, Europe, North America and Oceania) and four international academic organizations. There were only two domains, namely "scope and purpose" and "clarity of presentations" which got high average scores (more than 60%) among all 14 guidelines. The mean AGREE domain scores in guidelines varied with areas, and the quality of five evidence-based guidelines was superior to that established by consensus. According to the outcomes of AGREE Ⅲ, 11 guidelines were weakly recommended, while 3 were not recommended due to poor methodological quality. The subjects of 14 guidelines covered six treatment categories, including chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy, support therapy, radiotherapy, and interventional therapy. ConclusionThe overall methodological quality of pancreatic cancer guidelines is not high among different countries or regions. The quality of evidence-based guidelines is superior to that established by consensus. Chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy and support therapy were reccommended as predominant choice by these guidelines.
Multimorbidity is becoming a major issue in global health due to the increased prevalence of chronic diseases and the accelerated aging of the population. Clinical practice guidelines, as key tools for guiding clinical practice, play an important role in the field of multimorbidity, but also face many challenges. In this paper, we will review the necessity of developing multimorbidity guidelines, the current situation, challenges and opportunities, and on this basis, we will put forward our thoughts and suggestions to promote the development of guidelines in the field of multimorbidity in China.
Clinical pharmacy practice guidelines have developed rapidly in recent years. They provide a series of recommendations for optimizing drug treatment management and improving pharmaceutical care appropriateness and are widely employed in clinical practice. Based on literature review and the experience of guideline development, this paper summarized the meaning, formulation methods, formulation status, and registration of clinical pharmacy practice guidelines, and provided suggestions for the development of guidelines.
ObjectiveTo develop a transparent evaluation tool for the transparency of clinical practice guidelines.MethodsLiterature, books and policy documents related to the transparency of guidelines were retrieved from PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, WanFang Data and CNKI databases to form a pool of items. After two rounds of Delphi expert consultation, the items were modified and scored to determine whether to be included in the final evaluation system. Expert consensus would determine the organization and evaluation method of the final tool.ResultsA total of 77 references were included, and 399 items related to transparency of guidelines were extracted. The items pool containing 53 items was formed after normalization and de-duplication. After two rounds of Delphi consultation, the evaluation tool for transparency of clinical practice guidelines covering 32 items in 6 areas was formed. The established tool consisted of planning (5 items), personnel selection (6 items), conflict of interest management (6 items), recommendation formation process (8 items), external review process (3 items), and guide reporting process (4 items).ConclusionsThe developed evaluation tool for transparency of clinical practice guidelines can provide a standard for the formulation, evaluation and utilization of guidelines from the perspective of transparency.
Based on peer-reviewed systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials published from January 1990 to April 2016 with regards to the management of osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) developed the clinical practice guideline for the treatment of hip OA. This guideline provided practice recommendations including risk factors for hip OA, oral drugs and intraarticular injectables, physical therapies, perioperative hemostatic drug, anesthetic types, approach exposures, etc. The evidence of guideline was graded according to it’s strength. This article interpreted this guideline so as to provide reference for Chinese medical staffs and guideline developers.
ObjectiveTo adapt existing clinical practice guidelines to the management of medication adherence to highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in China, so as to provide evidence to support the development of practice guidelines that meet China's actual conditions. MethodsAccording to ADAPTE methodology and status of HAART in China, we searched, appraised, selected and adapted current clinical practice guidelines on the management of medication adherence to HAART. ResultsA total of 10 guidelines were included, and the final clinical practice guidelines for the management of medication adherence to HAART involved 3 aspects, including influential factors, assessment methods, and interventions. High quality evidence resources had been formed, and the quality of final clinical practice guidelines was higher. ConclusionIt is feasible to develop clinical practice guidelines according to the ADAPTE method, and reliable evidence support has been provided for the development of clinical practice guidelines based on guideline adaption.
Objective To verify the applicability of AGREE-China and select high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) or consensus for the management of fragility fractures (FF) in China by evaluating their methodological quality. Methods CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP databases and related CPGs websites were electronically searched. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and checked each other. Quality appraisal of CPGs or consensus were evaluated by AGREE Ⅱ and AGREE-China, and weighted Kappa value and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to illustrate the consistency of the two tools. Results Nine CPGs and sixteen consensuses were included. Among the six domains in AGREE Ⅱ, "scope and purpose" domain (62.22%) scored higher than "clarity of presentation" domain (45.67%). The "stakeholder involvement" domain (34.89%) and "applicability" domain (38.17%) both exceeded 30%, while "rigor of development" domain (18.79%) and "editorial independence" domain (13.33%) were lower. Among the five domains in AGREE-China, "conflict of interest" domain (72.80%) was higher, followed by "usability/feasibility" domain (49.87%), while "scientificity/preciseness" domain (20.36%), "effectiveness/safety" domain (25.20%) and "economic efficiency" domain (14.40%) were lower. The weighted Kappa value of recommendations from the two tools was 0.694 (P<0.001), showing moderate consistency. ICC values of the same items and two evaluators were all greater than 0.85 (P<0.001) with high consistency. Three high-quality CPGs were consistently selected by the two tools. Conclusion AGREE Ⅱ holds high consistency with AGREE-China; however, AGREE-China is more suitable for the quality appraisal of Chinese CPGs or consensus. The methodological quality of CPGs or consensus for the management of FF in China needs to be further improved.