ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2018
A critical review of recent clinical practice guidelines for pediatric urinary tract infection.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Critical Appraisal of Guidelines for Daytime Urinary Incontinence in Children: Evaluation of Quality and Recommendations on Diagnostics.Neurourology and urodynamics · 2025Article
- Predictors of Urinary Abnormalities in Children Hospitalised for Their First Urinary Tract Infection.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- Truth and consequences - The issue with standards and guidelines.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2018Article
- Applying Quality Improvement Methodology to Standardize Pediatric Urinary Tract Infection Diagnosis and Management throughout a Healthcare System.Pediatric quality & safetyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionConcerns regarding the quality, credibility, and applicability of recently published pediatric urinary tract infection (UTI) clinical practice guidelines have been raised due to the inconsistencies of recommendations between them. We aimed to determine the quality of the recent clinical practice guidelines on pediatric UTI by using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument, and summarize the standard of care in diagnosis and management of pediatric UTI from the top three clinical practice guidelines.
methodsA systematic literature search was performed on medical literature electronic databases and international guideline repository websites. English language-based clinical practice guidelines from 2007-2016 endorsed by any international society or government organization providing recommendations for the management of pediatric UTI were considered. Eligible clinical practice guidelines were independently appraised by six reviewers using the AGREE II tool. Clinical practice guidelines were assessed for standardized domains and summarized for overall quality. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using inter-class coefficient (ICC).
resultsThirteen clinical practice guidelines were critically reviewed. The Spanish clinical practice guidelines, American Academy of Pediatrics, and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence clinical practice guidelines consistently scored high on all AGREE domains (total averaged domain scores 90, 88, and 88, respectively). Among the six reviewers, there was a high degree of inter-rater reliability (average measure ICC 0.938; p<0.0001). There is reasonable consensus among the top three clinical practice guidelines in their major recommendations.
conclusionsThe clinical practice guidelines from Spain, American Academy of Pediatrics, and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, with their major recommendations being similar, have scored highly on the AGREE II indicators of quality for the clinical practice guidelines development process.
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.