ReviewPloS one2013
Analysis of quality of clinical practice guidelines for otorhinolaryngology in China.
Review in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for myasthenia gravis with the AGREE II instrument.PloS one · 2014Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The quality of guidelines on the end-of-life care: a systematic quality appraisal using AGREE II instrument.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020Review
- Assessing methodological quality of Russian clinical practice guidelines and introducing AGREE II instrument in Russia.PloS one · 2018Article
- Article
- A review of the quality of current diabetes clinical practice guidelines.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2017Article
- Quality appraisal of clinical practice guidelines on pancreatic cancer: a PRISMA-compliant article.Medicine · 2015Article
- Methodological rigour and transparency of clinical practice guidelines developed by neurology professional societies in Croatia.PloS one · 2013Article
- Assessing the Quality of Existing Clinical Practice Guidelines for Chemotherapy Drug Extravasation by Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for otorhinolaryngology in China. MATERIALS AND
methodsA systematic search of relevant literature databases (CBM, WANFANG, VIP, CNKI, China Guideline Clearinghouse) published between 1978 and March 2012 was undertaken to identify and select CPGs related to otorhinolaryngology. Four independent reviewers assessed the eligible guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. Their degree of agreement was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
resultFrom 170 citations, 21 relevant guidelines were included. The overall agreement among reviewers was moderate (ICC = 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78-0.91). The scores for each of the AGREE domains were the following: "scope and purpose" (mean ± standard error [SE] = 45.4±4.4; ICC = 0.92), "stakeholder involvement" (mean ± SE = 30.4±3.1; ICC = 0.81), "rigor of development" (mean ± SE = 20.9±2.8; ICC = 0.87), "clarity of presentation" (mean ± SE = 48.8±3.7; ICC = 0.80), "applicability" (mean ± SE = 12.6±1.7; ICC = 0.72), and "editorial independence" (mean ± SE = 6.2±0.8; ICC = 0.76). Three guidelines (14%) mentioned updates, and the average update frequency was 7 years. None used the GRADE system.
conclusionThe quality of otorhinolaryngology guidelines in China is low. Greater efforts are needed to provide high-quality guidelines that serve as a useful and reliable tool for clinical decision-making in this field.
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.