An evaluation of WHO emergency guidelines for Zika virus disease.
AGREE II
World Health Organization
Zika virus disease
evaluation studies
evidence-based practice
global health
guidelines
methods
quality control
Journal
Journal of evidence-based medicine
ISSN: 1756-5391
Titre abrégé: J Evid Based Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101497477
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2019
Aug 2019
Historique:
received:
02
02
2019
accepted:
07
05
2019
pubmed:
20
6
2019
medline:
6
2
2020
entrez:
20
6
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In the face of an unclear causal association between Zika virus in utero exposure and congenital abnormalities and urgent demand for guidance, the World Health Organization (WHO) had to produce timely and trustworthy guidelines during the 2016 Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). This is a cross-sectional evaluation of WHO emergency guidelines produced during the Zika virus disease PHEIC from 1 February to 18 November 2016. We assessed adherence to WHO publication requirements and the reporting of guideline development processes associated with trustworthiness. In the absence of quality appraisal tools for guidelines developed under compressed timeframes, we applied the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool. We included 21 guidelines (13 de novo and 8 updates). Six guidelines used a formal evidence review process. Most guidelines involved external experts in the development process and collected declarations of interest. Peer review was reported in six documents. Most emergency guidelines included updating plans. The highest scoring AGREE II domain was clarity of presentation (median score 78%); the lowest scoring domain was applicability (median score 18%). WHO developed moderate- to high-quality emergency guidelines in the challenging context of a PHEIC. We found improvement opportunities for WHO guideline development teams in the use of evidence to formulate recommendations, the collection of declarations of interest, reporting of conflicts of interest, and the use of existing WHO organizational quality assurance processes.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In the face of an unclear causal association between Zika virus in utero exposure and congenital abnormalities and urgent demand for guidance, the World Health Organization (WHO) had to produce timely and trustworthy guidelines during the 2016 Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC).
METHODS
METHODS
This is a cross-sectional evaluation of WHO emergency guidelines produced during the Zika virus disease PHEIC from 1 February to 18 November 2016. We assessed adherence to WHO publication requirements and the reporting of guideline development processes associated with trustworthiness. In the absence of quality appraisal tools for guidelines developed under compressed timeframes, we applied the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We included 21 guidelines (13 de novo and 8 updates). Six guidelines used a formal evidence review process. Most guidelines involved external experts in the development process and collected declarations of interest. Peer review was reported in six documents. Most emergency guidelines included updating plans. The highest scoring AGREE II domain was clarity of presentation (median score 78%); the lowest scoring domain was applicability (median score 18%).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
WHO developed moderate- to high-quality emergency guidelines in the challenging context of a PHEIC. We found improvement opportunities for WHO guideline development teams in the use of evidence to formulate recommendations, the collection of declarations of interest, reporting of conflicts of interest, and the use of existing WHO organizational quality assurance processes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31215148
doi: 10.1111/jebm.12347
pmc: PMC6771472
doi:
Types de publication
Evaluation Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
218-224Subventions
Organisme : World Health Organization
ID : 001
Pays : International
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Government of Japan
Organisme : UNICEF/UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (WHO/TDR)
Informations de copyright
© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine published by Chinese Cochrane Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
Références
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017 Apr 27;11(4):e0005531
pubmed: 28448488
PLoS One. 2013 Dec 09;8(12):e82915
pubmed: 24349397
CMAJ. 2010 Jul 13;182(10):E472-8
pubmed: 20513779
J Evid Based Med. 2019 Aug;12(3):218-224
pubmed: 31215148
N Engl J Med. 2016 Apr 21;374(16):1552-63
pubmed: 27028561
CMAJ. 2010 Dec 14;182(18):E839-42
pubmed: 20603348
CMAJ. 2010 Jul 13;182(10):1045-52
pubmed: 20513780
N Engl J Med. 2016 Apr 21;374(16):1506-9
pubmed: 26959308
PLoS One. 2018 May 30;13(5):e0198125
pubmed: 29847593
PLoS Med. 2017 Jan 10;14(1):e1002207
pubmed: 28072838
N Engl J Med. 2017 Apr 20;376(16):1591-1593
pubmed: 28402236
Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 2016 Sep-Oct;49(5):553-558
pubmed: 27812648
Public Health. 2014 May;128(5):444-74
pubmed: 24856197