ArticleDeutsches Arzteblatt international2015
Evaluating Guidelines: A Review of Key Quality Criteria.
Article in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The 2024 Endocrine Society Guideline on Vitamin D: Comprehensive Summary and Critical Appraisal.Nutrients · 2026Pooled it
- Recommendations for managing adults with chronic non-cancer pain in primary care: A systematic clinical guideline review.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Pooled it
- Recommendations for the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in primary care: a systematic guideline review.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Guideline for the management of neurogenic bowel dysfunction in spinal cord injury/disease.Spinal cord · 2022Guideline
- Current Guidelines on Dietary Protein Intake for Patients with Diabetic Kidney Disease: A Scoping Review.Current developments in nutrition · 2025Review
- Investigator-initiated versus industry-sponsored trials - visibility and relevance of randomized controlled trials in clinical practice guidelines (IMPACT).BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Article
- Mandatory Vaccination Against COVID-19: Twitter Poll Analysis on Public Health Opinion.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- The International Guideline Evaluation Screening Tool (IGEST): development and validation.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- Evidence-Based Decision Support for a Structured Care Program on Polypharmacy in Multimorbidity: A Guideline Upgrade Based on a Realist Synthesis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of treatment-resistant depression: A systematic review protocol.PloS one · 2022Article
- Management of arterial hypertension: Transfer from clinical guidelines into daily practice - Results of a survey in German practitioners offices.Journal of education and health promotion · 2020Article
- Nonpharmacological interventions for osteoporosis treatment: Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines.Osteoporosis and sarcopenia · 2019Review
- European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (EFSUMB) Policy Document Development Strategy - Clinical Practice Guidelines, Position Statements and Technological Reviews.Ultrasound international open · 2019Article
- The Diagnosis and Treatment of Carbon Monoxide Poisoning.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2018Review
- Methodological quality and transparency of clinical practice guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of non-communicable diseases using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2017Article
- An interpretive review of consensus statements on clinical guideline development and their application in the field of traditional and complementary medicine.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2017Review
- South African clinical practice guidelines quality measured with complex and rapid appraisal instruments.BMC research notes · 2016Article
- Validation and reliability of a guideline appraisal mini-checklist for daily practice use.BMC medical research methodology · 2016Article
- In Reply.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on byIn Reply.2016
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGuidelines of high methodological quality make an essential contribution to the quality assurance of medical knowledge. The detailed evaluation of guideline quality is a complex and time-consuming task. The answers to a few key questions generally suffice for an initial, rapid assessment of the quality and utility of a guideline.
methodWe selectively searched the pertinent literature for guideline-assessing instruments and analyzed selected ones with respect to their target group, purpose, orientation, and comprehensiveness. We identified key questions from brief instruments that can be used to assess guideline quality rapidly.
resultsA comparison of ten instruments revealed that most were designed to provide a highly detailed assessment of guideline quality. Four recently developed instruments enable a rough and rapid assessment. They focus, in essence, on four key questions: Was the evidence analyzed systematically? Does the evidence support the recommendations? Is the goal of the guideline formulated, and are the authors named? Is the organization of the guideline easy to follow, and are the recommendations clearly signposted?
conclusionAlongside the comprehensive instruments for assessing guidelines, such as DELBI and AGREE II, rapid-assessment instruments are a convenient tool for gaining a quick impression of the value of a guideline.
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.