Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II
Abstract Objective The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) is a representative, quantitative evaluation tool for evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Recently, AGREE was revised (AGREE II). The continuity of evaluation data obtained from the original version (A...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2017-12-01
|
| Series: | BMC Research Notes |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13104-017-3041-7 |
| _version_ | 1819065923347152896 |
|---|---|
| author | Kanako Seto Kunichika Matsumoto Takefumi Kitazawa Shigeru Fujita Shimpei Hanaoka Tomonori Hasegawa |
| author_facet | Kanako Seto Kunichika Matsumoto Takefumi Kitazawa Shigeru Fujita Shimpei Hanaoka Tomonori Hasegawa |
| author_sort | Kanako Seto |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Objective The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) is a representative, quantitative evaluation tool for evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Recently, AGREE was revised (AGREE II). The continuity of evaluation data obtained from the original version (AGREE I) has not yet been demonstrated. The present study investigated the relationship between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II to evaluate the continuity between the two measurement tools. Results An evaluation team consisting of three trained librarians evaluated 68 CPGs issued in 2011–2012 in Japan using AGREE I and AGREE II. The correlation coefficients for the six domains were: (1) scope and purpose 0.758; (2) stakeholder involvement 0.708; (3) rigor of development 0.982; (4) clarity of presentation 0.702; (5) applicability 0.919; and (6) editorial independence 0.971. The item “Overall Guideline Assessment” was newly introduced in AGREE II. This global item had a correlation coefficient of 0.628 using the six AGREE I domains, and 0.685 using the 23 items. Our results suggest that data obtained from AGREE I can be transferred to AGREE II, and the “Overall Guideline Assessment” data can be determined with high reliability using a standardized score of the 23 items. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-21T15:54:10Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-c7065c2d3ec847bebcddf418cc0d26e1 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1756-0500 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-21T15:54:10Z |
| publishDate | 2017-12-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Research Notes |
| spelling | doaj.art-c7065c2d3ec847bebcddf418cc0d26e12022-12-21T18:58:09ZengBMCBMC Research Notes1756-05002017-12-011011710.1186/s13104-017-3041-7Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE IIKanako Seto0Kunichika Matsumoto1Takefumi Kitazawa2Shigeru Fujita3Shimpei Hanaoka4Tomonori Hasegawa5Department of Social Medicine, School of Medicine, Toho UniversityDepartment of Social Medicine, School of Medicine, Toho UniversityDepartment of Social Medicine, School of Medicine, Toho UniversityDepartment of Social Medicine, School of Medicine, Toho UniversityDepartment of Social Medicine, School of Medicine, Toho UniversityDepartment of Social Medicine, School of Medicine, Toho UniversityAbstract Objective The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) is a representative, quantitative evaluation tool for evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Recently, AGREE was revised (AGREE II). The continuity of evaluation data obtained from the original version (AGREE I) has not yet been demonstrated. The present study investigated the relationship between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II to evaluate the continuity between the two measurement tools. Results An evaluation team consisting of three trained librarians evaluated 68 CPGs issued in 2011–2012 in Japan using AGREE I and AGREE II. The correlation coefficients for the six domains were: (1) scope and purpose 0.758; (2) stakeholder involvement 0.708; (3) rigor of development 0.982; (4) clarity of presentation 0.702; (5) applicability 0.919; and (6) editorial independence 0.971. The item “Overall Guideline Assessment” was newly introduced in AGREE II. This global item had a correlation coefficient of 0.628 using the six AGREE I domains, and 0.685 using the 23 items. Our results suggest that data obtained from AGREE I can be transferred to AGREE II, and the “Overall Guideline Assessment” data can be determined with high reliability using a standardized score of the 23 items.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13104-017-3041-7Clinical practice guidelinesAGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation) instrumentData transferData mapping |
| spellingShingle | Kanako Seto Kunichika Matsumoto Takefumi Kitazawa Shigeru Fujita Shimpei Hanaoka Tomonori Hasegawa Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II BMC Research Notes Clinical practice guidelines AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation) instrument Data transfer Data mapping |
| title | Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II |
| title_full | Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II |
| title_fullStr | Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II |
| title_short | Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II |
| title_sort | evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the agree instrument comparison between data obtained from agree i and agree ii |
| topic | Clinical practice guidelines AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation) instrument Data transfer Data mapping |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13104-017-3041-7 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT kanakoseto evaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesusingtheagreeinstrumentcomparisonbetweendataobtainedfromagreeiandagreeii AT kunichikamatsumoto evaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesusingtheagreeinstrumentcomparisonbetweendataobtainedfromagreeiandagreeii AT takefumikitazawa evaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesusingtheagreeinstrumentcomparisonbetweendataobtainedfromagreeiandagreeii AT shigerufujita evaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesusingtheagreeinstrumentcomparisonbetweendataobtainedfromagreeiandagreeii AT shimpeihanaoka evaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesusingtheagreeinstrumentcomparisonbetweendataobtainedfromagreeiandagreeii AT tomonorihasegawa evaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesusingtheagreeinstrumentcomparisonbetweendataobtainedfromagreeiandagreeii |