SynthesisSystematic reviews2018
The quality of clinical practice guidelines for management of pediatric type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review using the AGREE II instrument.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality assessment of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) for the diagnosis and treatment of inflammatory bowel disease using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Pooled it
- International clinical practice guidelines for gender minority/trans people: systematic review and quality assessment.BMJ open · 2021Pooled it
- Effectiveness and process evaluation in obesity and type 2 diabetes prevention programs in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2021Pooled it
- Methodological Quality and Content of Guidelines on Early Childhood Allergy Prevention: A Systematic Assessment and Content Analysis.Maternal & child nutrition · 2025Review
- Methodological quality and recommendations of hemophilia clinical practice guidelines: A scoping review.Health science reports · 2023Article
- KDOQI US Commentary on the KDIGO 2020 Clinical Practice Guideline for Diabetes Management in CKD.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2022Article
- Impact of virtual care on health-related quality of life in children with diabetes mellitus: a systematic review protocol.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Article
- Comparison of Content and Quality of Caribbean, International, and High-Income Country-Specific Clinical Guidelines for Managing Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Quality of pediatric clinical practice guidelines.BMC pediatrics · 2021Article
- Assessing the Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region: A Systematic Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2021Article
- Review
- Article
- The structure of the quality of clinical practice guidelines with the items and overall assessment in AGREE II: a regression analysis.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- A quality assessment of evidence-based guidelines for the prevention and management of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a systematic review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Article
- Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument in Japan: A time trend analysis.PloS one · 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
12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsPediatric type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a relatively new disease with increasing incidence corresponding to the obesity epidemic among youth. It is important for clinicians to have access to high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for appropriate management of pediatric patients with T2DM. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate overall quality of CPGs for the management of pediatric T2DM using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Trip, National Guideline Clearinghouse, and grey literature to identify eligible CPGs. We also searched the webpages of national and international diabetes and pediatric organizations globally. We included CPGs from national and international diabetes and pediatric associations that were published as standalone guidelines for T2DM in children and adolescents (2-18 years of age). We also included pediatric and adult guidelines for type 1 diabetes if they included a section addressing T2DM management in children and adolescents. We retrieved the two most recent guidelines from each organization when available to assess change in quality over time. We excluded individual studies and systematic reviews that made treatment recommendations as well as CPGs that were developed for a single institution.
resultsWe included 21 unique CPGs in this systematic review. Of the included guidelines, 12 were developed or updated between 2012 and 2014. Five of all included CPGs were specific to pediatric populations. The analysis revealed that "Rigour of Development" (mean 45%, SD 28.68) and "Editorial Independence" (mean 45%, SD 35.19) were the lowest scoring domains on the AGREE II for the majority of guidelines, whereas "Clarity of Presentation" was the highest scoring domain (mean 72%, SD 18.89).
conclusionsOverall, two thirds of the pediatric T2DM guidelines were moderate to low quality and the remaining third ranked higher in quality. Low quality was especially due to the scores for the "Rigour of Development" domain, which directly measures guideline development methodology. It is important that future guidelines and updates of existing guidelines improve the methodology of development and quality of reporting in order to appropriately guide physicians managing children and adolescents with T2DM. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016034187.
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.