ArticlePloS one2016
Non-Communicable Disease Clinical Practice Guidelines in Brazil: A Systematic Assessment of Methodological Quality and Transparency.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- School-based self-management interventions for asthma in children and adolescents: a mixed methods systematic review.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Therapeutic competitions and frailty among older adults in São Paulo city: a cross-sectional population-based study, 2015.Epidemiologia e servicos de saude : revista do Sistema Unico de Saude do Brasil · 2025Article
- Article
- Methodological characteristics of Peruvian clinical practice guidelines, 2018 - 2023: A scoping review.PloS one · 2025Article
- Clinical guidelines for herpes labialis: recommendations and quality evaluation according to AGREE II.Acta odontologica latinoamericana : AOL · 2024Review
- Breaking the vicious circle-the Asthma Referral Identifier (ReferID) tool.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2022Review
- Factors Associated with the Quality and Transparency of National Guidelines: A Mixed-Methods Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- The quality of guidelines for treatment of carotid artery disease: a critical appraisal using the AGREE II instrument.Jornal vascular brasileiro · 2022Review
- Critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for depression in children and adolescents: A protocol for systematic review.Medicine · 2020Article
- Clinical practice guidelines in Brazil - developing a national programme.Health research policy and systems · 2020Article
- Extending the RIGHT statement for reporting adapted practice guidelines in healthcare: the RIGHT-Ad@pt Checklist protocol.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Review of evidence based clinical practice guidelines developed in Latin America and Caribbean during the last decade: an analysis of the methods for grading quality of evidence and topic prioritization.Globalization and health · 2019Review
- The different clinical guideline standards in Brazil: High cost treatment diseases versus poverty-related diseases.PloS one · 2018Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnnually, non-communicable diseases (NCDs) kill 38 million people worldwide, with low and middle-income countries accounting for three-quarters of these deaths. High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are fundamental to improving NCD management. The present study evaluated the methodological rigor and transparency of Brazilian CPGs that recommend pharmacological treatment for the most prevalent NCDs.
methodsWe conducted a systematic search for CPGs of the following NCDs: asthma, atrial fibrillation, benign prostatic hyperplasia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease and/or stable angina, dementia, depression, diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux disease, hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, osteoarthritis, and osteoporosis. CPGs comprising pharmacological treatment recommendations were included. No language or year restrictions were applied. CPGs were excluded if they were merely for local use and referred to NCDs not listed above. CPG quality was independently assessed by two reviewers using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation instrument, version II (AGREE II). MAIN
findings"Scope and purpose" and "clarity and presentation" domains received the highest scores. Sixteen of 26 CPGs were classified as low quality, and none were classified as high overall quality. No CPG was recommended without modification (77% were not recommended at all). After 2009, 2 domain scores ("rigor of development" and "clarity and presentation") increased (61% and 73%, respectively). However, "rigor of development" was still rated < 30%.
conclusionBrazilian healthcare professionals should be concerned with CPG quality for the treatment of selected NCDs. Features that undermined AGREE II scores included the lack of a multidisciplinary team for the development group, no consideration of patients' preferences, insufficient information regarding literature searches, lack of selection criteria, formulating recommendations, authors' conflict of interest disclosures, and funding body influence.
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.