SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2018
A critical appraisal of the quality of low back pain practice guidelines using the AGREE II tool and comparison with previous evaluations: a EuroAIM initiative.
Synthesis in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Acupuncture recommendations for migraine in headache treatment guidelines: a systematic review.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2025Pooled it
- Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the management of acute ankle injuries according to: a PRISMA systematic review and quality appraisal with AGREE II.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Pooled it
- Are clinical practice guidelines for low back pain interventions of high quality and updated? A systematic review using the AGREE II instrument.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- Imaging versus no imaging for low back pain: a systematic review, measuring costs, healthcare utilization and absence from work.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2019Pooled it
- Article
- Guidelines for chronic pain in adult spinal cord injury population: Scoping review.The South African journal of physiotherapy · 2024Article
- COVID-19 therapies for inpatients: a review and quality assessment of clinical guidelines.ERJ open research · 2022Review
- More than one third of clinical practice guidelines on low back pain overlap in AGREE II appraisals. Research wasted?BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- Recommendations for Diagnosis and Treatment of Lumbosacral Radicular Pain: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Critical appraisal of papers reporting recommendation on sarcopenia using the AGREE II tool: a EuroAIM initiative.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2020Article
- Sex and gender considerations in low back pain clinical practice guidelines: a scoping review.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2020Article
- A Critical Appraisal of the Quality of Glioma Imaging Guidelines Using the AGREE II Tool: A EuroAIM Initiative.Frontiers in oncology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the methodologic quality of guidelines for the management of low back pain (LBP) and compare their recommendations.
methodsNo ethics committee approval was needed for this systematic review. In March 2017, a systematic search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, National Guideline Clearinghouse, and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence to find practice guidelines of assessment and management of LBP. The evaluation of guidelines quality was performed independently by four authors using the AGREE II tool, and the results were compared with previous appraisals performed in 2004 and 2009.
resultsOf 114 retrieved guidelines, eight were appraised. All except one reached the level of "acceptable" in overall result, with two of them reaching the highest scores. Only two guidelines reached a level of "acceptable" in every domain; the others had at least one domain with low scores. The guidelines had the higher scores (range = 63-94%) on "Scope and purpose" and "Clarity of presentation" (47-89%). "Stakeholder Involvement" has the highest variability between the guidelines results (40-96%). "Rigor of Development" reached an intermediate mean result (34-90%), "Applicability" (42-70%), and "Editorial Independence" (38-85%). Only three guidelines had a radiologist among authors and reached higher scores compared to guidelines without a radiologist among the authors. Compared to previous assessments, low-level guidelines were 53% in 2004, 36% in 2009, and 13% in 2017.
conclusionsConsidering all guidelines, only one had a "low" overall score, while half of them were rated as of "high" quality. Future guidelines might take this into account to improve clinical applicability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30220040What 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.