Evaluation of evidence grades in psychiatry and psychotherapy guidelines.
Distribution of recommendations
Evidence grade
German guidelines of psychiatry and psychotherapy
Rrecommendations
SIGN guidelines
Journal
BMC psychiatry
ISSN: 1471-244X
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychiatry
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968559
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 10 2020
12 10 2020
Historique:
received:
17
01
2020
accepted:
24
09
2020
entrez:
13
10
2020
pubmed:
14
10
2020
medline:
11
2
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Information regarding the distribution of evidence grades in psychiatry and psychotherapy guidelines is lacking. Based on the German evidence- and consensus- based (S3) psychiatry and psychotherapy and the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) treatment guidelines, we aimed to specify how guideline recommendations are composed and to what extent recommendations are evidence-based. Data was collected from all published evidence- and consensus-based S3-classified psychiatry and psychotherapy guidelines. As control conditions, data from German neurology S3-classified guidelines as well as data from recent SIGN guidelines of mental health were extracted. Two investigators reviewed the selected guidelines independently, extracted and analysed the numbers and levels of recommendations. On average, 45.1% of all recommendations are not based on strong scientific evidence in German guidelines of psychiatry and psychotherapy. A related pattern can be confirmed for SIGN guidelines, where the mean average of recommendations with lacking evidence is 33.9%. By contrast, in the German guidelines of neurology the average of such recommendations is 16.5%. A total of 24.5% of all recommendations in the guidelines of psychiatry and psychotherapy are classified as level A recommendations, compared to 31.6% in the field of neurology and 31.1% in the SIGN guidelines. Related patterns were observed for B and 0 level recommendations. Guidelines should be practical tools to simplify the decision-making process based on scientific evidence. Up to 45% of all recommendations in the investigated guidelines of psychiatry and psychotherapy are not based on strong scientific evidence. The reasons for this high number remain unclear. Possibly, only a limited number of studies answer clinically relevant questions. Our findings thereby question whether guidelines should include non-evidence-based recommendations to be methodologically stringent and whether specific processes to develop expert-opinion statements must be implemented.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Information regarding the distribution of evidence grades in psychiatry and psychotherapy guidelines is lacking. Based on the German evidence- and consensus- based (S3) psychiatry and psychotherapy and the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) treatment guidelines, we aimed to specify how guideline recommendations are composed and to what extent recommendations are evidence-based.
METHODS
Data was collected from all published evidence- and consensus-based S3-classified psychiatry and psychotherapy guidelines. As control conditions, data from German neurology S3-classified guidelines as well as data from recent SIGN guidelines of mental health were extracted. Two investigators reviewed the selected guidelines independently, extracted and analysed the numbers and levels of recommendations.
RESULTS
On average, 45.1% of all recommendations are not based on strong scientific evidence in German guidelines of psychiatry and psychotherapy. A related pattern can be confirmed for SIGN guidelines, where the mean average of recommendations with lacking evidence is 33.9%. By contrast, in the German guidelines of neurology the average of such recommendations is 16.5%. A total of 24.5% of all recommendations in the guidelines of psychiatry and psychotherapy are classified as level A recommendations, compared to 31.6% in the field of neurology and 31.1% in the SIGN guidelines. Related patterns were observed for B and 0 level recommendations.
CONCLUSION
Guidelines should be practical tools to simplify the decision-making process based on scientific evidence. Up to 45% of all recommendations in the investigated guidelines of psychiatry and psychotherapy are not based on strong scientific evidence. The reasons for this high number remain unclear. Possibly, only a limited number of studies answer clinically relevant questions. Our findings thereby question whether guidelines should include non-evidence-based recommendations to be methodologically stringent and whether specific processes to develop expert-opinion statements must be implemented.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33046040
doi: 10.1186/s12888-020-02897-2
pii: 10.1186/s12888-020-02897-2
pmc: PMC7552557
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
503Références
BMJ. 2003 Dec 20;327(7429):1459-61
pubmed: 14684649
BMJ. 1996 Jan 13;312(7023):71-2
pubmed: 8555924
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(16):1-69
pubmed: 11427188
Evid Based Med. 2017 Oct;22(5):164-169
pubmed: 28924055
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018 Jan 17;100(2):e10
pubmed: 29342070
Z Rheumatol. 2010 Jun;69(4):298-304
pubmed: 20490515
World J Biol Psychiatry. 2019 Jan;20(1):2-16
pubmed: 30526182
JAMA. 2002 Feb 6;287(5):612-7
pubmed: 11829700
BMJ. 2013 Jun 14;346:f3830
pubmed: 23771225
BMJ Open. 2014 Feb 05;4(2):e004278
pubmed: 24500613
BMJ. 2005 Sep 17;331(7517):631-3
pubmed: 16166137
Nervenarzt. 2016 Jan;87(1):1-3
pubmed: 26666767
BMJ. 1999 Feb 20;318(7182):527-30
pubmed: 10024268