ArticleSystematic reviews2017
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.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Models and frameworks for assessing the implementation of clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Treatment of urinary incontinence: a critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines with the AGREE II instrument.International urogynecology journal · 2021Pooled 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
- Assessing the Integrity of Clinical Trials Included in Evidence Syntheses.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Quality and Specific Concerns of Clinical Guidelines for Integrated Chinese and Western Medicine: A Critical Appraisal.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020Article
- Venom allergy treatment practices in Poland in comparison to guidelines: next edition of the national audit.Postepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading cause of death worldwide. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) constitute an important tool for the promotion of evidence-based health, which may improve healthcare outcomes for individuals with NCDs. Studies have shown that many CPGs have poor or moderate quality. Therefore, the aim of the proposed study is to systematically identify and appraise CPGs for pharmacological treatment of the most prevalent NCDs in primary care.
methodsA comprehensive literature search will be conducted in the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library. Twelve databases specific to CPGs will also be searched. Three appraisers will assess the quality of the CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) Instrument, version II. The AGREE II results will be checked for discrepancies. Differences between scores equal than or greater to 2 will be considered discrepant and the appraisers will decide the final score by consensus. If no consensus is reached, a fourth appraiser will decide the score. According to the AGREE II User's Manual, the six domains of the instrument are independent. Thus, each domain score will be calculated by the sum of the individual item scores and scaling the total as a percentage of the maximum possible score for the domain. DISCUSSION: The AGREE II instrument will be applied to evaluate the quality of CPGs and contribute to enhance the discussion and development of guidelines of high quality. The findings will be submitted for publication in high-impact, peer-reviewed scientific journals and will also be disseminated at international conferences. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016043364.
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.