ArticleBMC health services research2006
Methods underpinning national clinical guidelines for hypertension: describing the evidence shortfall.
Article in BMC health services research, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines in the diagnosis and management of thyroid nodules and cancer.BMC medicine · 2013Pooled it
- A systematic review of recent clinical practice guidelines on the diagnosis, assessment and management of hypertension.PloS one · 2013Pooled it
- Postpartum care indications and methodological quality:a systematic review of guidelines.Zeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health · 2022Review
- Review
- Tools for assessing the content of guidelines are needed to enable their effective use--a systematic comparison.BMC research notes · 2014Article
- The basis for monitoring strategies in clinical guidelines: a case study of prostate-specific antigen for monitoring in prostate cancer.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2012Article
- [Improved effectiveness in the management of cardiovascular risk among type 2 diabetic patients in primary health care].Atencion primaria · 2009Article
- Communication between secondary and primary care following self-harm: are National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines being met?Annals of general psychiatry · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo be useful, clinical practice guidelines need to be evidence based; otherwise they will not achieve the validity, reliability and credibility required for implementation.
methodsThis paper compares the methods used in gathering, analysing and linking of evidence to guideline recommendations in ten current hypertension guidelines.
resultsIt found several guidelines had failed to implement methods of searching for the relevant literature, critical analysis and linking to recommendations that minimise the risk of bias in the interpretation of research evidence. The more rigorous guidelines showed discrepancies in recommendations and grading that reflected different approaches to the use of evidence in guideline development.
conclusionClinical practice guidelines as a methodology are clearly still an evolving health care technology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.