Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for myasthenia gravis with the AGREE II instrument.

<h4>Background</h4>Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are systematically developed statements to assist practitioners in making decisions about appropriate healthcare in specific clinical circumstances. The methodological quality of CPGs for myasthenia gravis (MG) are unclear.<h4>...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zhenchang Zhang, Jia Guo, Gang Su, Jiong Li, Hua Wu, Xiaodong Xie
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111796
_version_ 1818666548216201216
author Zhenchang Zhang
Jia Guo
Gang Su
Jiong Li
Hua Wu
Xiaodong Xie
author_facet Zhenchang Zhang
Jia Guo
Gang Su
Jiong Li
Hua Wu
Xiaodong Xie
author_sort Zhenchang Zhang
collection DOAJ
description <h4>Background</h4>Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are systematically developed statements to assist practitioners in making decisions about appropriate healthcare in specific clinical circumstances. The methodological quality of CPGs for myasthenia gravis (MG) are unclear.<h4>Objective</h4>To critically evaluate the methodological quality of CPGs for MG using AGREE II instrument.<h4>Method</h4>A systematical search strategy on PubMed, EMBASE, DynaMed, the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC) and the Chinese Biomedical Literature database (CBM) was performed on September 20th 2013. All guidelines related to MG were evaluated with AGREE II. The software used for analysis was SPSS 17.0.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 15 CPGs for MG met the inclusion criteria (12 CPGs in English, 3 CPGs in Chinese). The overall agreement among reviews was moderate or high (ICC >0.70). The mean scores (mean ± SD) for al six domains were presented as follows: scope and purpose (60.93% ± 16.62%), stakeholder involvement (40.93% ± 20.04%), rigor of development (37.22% ± 30.46%), clarity of presentation (64.26% ± 16.36%), applicability (28.19% ± 20.56%) and editorial independence (27.78% ± 28.28%). Compared with non-evidence-based CPGs, evidence-based CPGs had statistically significant higher quality scores for all AGREE II domains (P<0.05). All domain scores appear slightly higher for CPGs published after AGREE II instrument development and validation (P>0.05). The quality scores of CPGs developed by NGC/AAN were higher than the quality scores of CPGs developed by other organizations for all domains. The difference was statistically significant for all domains with the exception of clarity of presentation (P = 0.07).<h4>Conclusions</h4>The qualities of CPGs on MG were generally acceptable with several flaws. The AGREE II instrument should be adopted by guideline developers, particularly in China.
first_indexed 2024-12-17T06:06:17Z
format Article
id doaj.art-2eb48b4785c94bdbb24a8a5272e1dee0
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1932-6203
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-17T06:06:17Z
publishDate 2014-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj.art-2eb48b4785c94bdbb24a8a5272e1dee02022-12-21T22:00:45ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-01911e11179610.1371/journal.pone.0111796Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for myasthenia gravis with the AGREE II instrument.Zhenchang ZhangJia GuoGang SuJiong LiHua WuXiaodong Xie<h4>Background</h4>Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are systematically developed statements to assist practitioners in making decisions about appropriate healthcare in specific clinical circumstances. The methodological quality of CPGs for myasthenia gravis (MG) are unclear.<h4>Objective</h4>To critically evaluate the methodological quality of CPGs for MG using AGREE II instrument.<h4>Method</h4>A systematical search strategy on PubMed, EMBASE, DynaMed, the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC) and the Chinese Biomedical Literature database (CBM) was performed on September 20th 2013. All guidelines related to MG were evaluated with AGREE II. The software used for analysis was SPSS 17.0.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 15 CPGs for MG met the inclusion criteria (12 CPGs in English, 3 CPGs in Chinese). The overall agreement among reviews was moderate or high (ICC >0.70). The mean scores (mean ± SD) for al six domains were presented as follows: scope and purpose (60.93% ± 16.62%), stakeholder involvement (40.93% ± 20.04%), rigor of development (37.22% ± 30.46%), clarity of presentation (64.26% ± 16.36%), applicability (28.19% ± 20.56%) and editorial independence (27.78% ± 28.28%). Compared with non-evidence-based CPGs, evidence-based CPGs had statistically significant higher quality scores for all AGREE II domains (P<0.05). All domain scores appear slightly higher for CPGs published after AGREE II instrument development and validation (P>0.05). The quality scores of CPGs developed by NGC/AAN were higher than the quality scores of CPGs developed by other organizations for all domains. The difference was statistically significant for all domains with the exception of clarity of presentation (P = 0.07).<h4>Conclusions</h4>The qualities of CPGs on MG were generally acceptable with several flaws. The AGREE II instrument should be adopted by guideline developers, particularly in China.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111796
spellingShingle Zhenchang Zhang
Jia Guo
Gang Su
Jiong Li
Hua Wu
Xiaodong Xie
Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for myasthenia gravis with the AGREE II instrument.
PLoS ONE
title Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for myasthenia gravis with the AGREE II instrument.
title_full Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for myasthenia gravis with the AGREE II instrument.
title_fullStr Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for myasthenia gravis with the AGREE II instrument.
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for myasthenia gravis with the AGREE II instrument.
title_short Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for myasthenia gravis with the AGREE II instrument.
title_sort evaluation of the quality of guidelines for myasthenia gravis with the agree ii instrument
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111796
work_keys_str_mv AT zhenchangzhang evaluationofthequalityofguidelinesformyastheniagraviswiththeagreeiiinstrument
AT jiaguo evaluationofthequalityofguidelinesformyastheniagraviswiththeagreeiiinstrument
AT gangsu evaluationofthequalityofguidelinesformyastheniagraviswiththeagreeiiinstrument
AT jiongli evaluationofthequalityofguidelinesformyastheniagraviswiththeagreeiiinstrument
AT huawu evaluationofthequalityofguidelinesformyastheniagraviswiththeagreeiiinstrument
AT xiaodongxie evaluationofthequalityofguidelinesformyastheniagraviswiththeagreeiiinstrument