Guidelines in Low and Middle Income Countries Paper 3: Appraisal of Philippine Clinical Practice Guidelines using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II: improvement needed for rigor, applicability, and editorial independence.
AGREE II
Applicability
Appraisal
Clinical practice guidelines
Editorial independence
Philippines
Rigor of development
Journal
Journal of clinical epidemiology
ISSN: 1878-5921
Titre abrégé: J Clin Epidemiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8801383
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2020
11 2020
Historique:
received:
09
11
2019
revised:
10
06
2020
accepted:
29
06
2020
pubmed:
6
7
2020
medline:
6
3
2021
entrez:
5
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are needed to guide practitioners, policy makers, and other stakeholders to provide optimal health care. This study aims to appraise the CPGs developed in the Philippines using the AGREE II instrument. Ninety-one CPGs were appraised independently by two health-care professionals. CPGs were considered acceptable if they garnered an overall mean score of at least 75.0% for all 6 domains and a domain score of at least 75.0% for rigor of development. A mean score of <75.0% on either of the criteria implied that the CPG needed revision. Overall mean scores of the CPGs ranged from 8.4% to 79.2%, with a mean of 43.9% (standard deviation = 13.4%). In general, CPGs scored better for the domains of clarity of presentation, scope and purpose, and stakeholder involvement. Lowest scores were obtained for the domains of rigor of development, applicability, and editorial independence. Only 1 (1.1%) CPG qualified as acceptable. AGREE II is a practical and useful guide in appraising the quality of CPGs. Strengthening technical capacity in various medical fields is essential to improve the quality of CPGs. Rigor of development, applicability issues, and editorial independence should be emphasized in CPG capacity-building activities.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are needed to guide practitioners, policy makers, and other stakeholders to provide optimal health care. This study aims to appraise the CPGs developed in the Philippines using the AGREE II instrument.
METHODS
Ninety-one CPGs were appraised independently by two health-care professionals. CPGs were considered acceptable if they garnered an overall mean score of at least 75.0% for all 6 domains and a domain score of at least 75.0% for rigor of development. A mean score of <75.0% on either of the criteria implied that the CPG needed revision.
RESULTS
Overall mean scores of the CPGs ranged from 8.4% to 79.2%, with a mean of 43.9% (standard deviation = 13.4%). In general, CPGs scored better for the domains of clarity of presentation, scope and purpose, and stakeholder involvement. Lowest scores were obtained for the domains of rigor of development, applicability, and editorial independence. Only 1 (1.1%) CPG qualified as acceptable.
CONCLUSION
AGREE II is a practical and useful guide in appraising the quality of CPGs. Strengthening technical capacity in various medical fields is essential to improve the quality of CPGs. Rigor of development, applicability issues, and editorial independence should be emphasized in CPG capacity-building activities.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32621853
pii: S0895-4356(19)31029-7
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.06.036
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
184-190Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.