Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31496524›Full record

SynthesisThe Indian journal of medical research2019

A systematic review of standard treatment guidelines in India.

Paresh Girdharlal Koli, Nilima A Kshirsagar, Yashashri C Shetty, Dhvani Mehta, Yashaswini Mittal, Urwashi Parmar

Open access · diamondAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Indian journal of medical research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Attributes of Standard Treatment Guidelines in Clinical Settings and Public Health Facilities in India.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Paresh Girdharlal KoliDepartment of Pharmacology & Therapeutics, Seth Gordhandas Sunderdas Medical College & King Edward Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India.
Nilima A KshirsagarNational Chair of Clinical Pharmacology, Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi, India.
Yashashri C ShettyDepartment of Pharmacology & Therapeutics, Seth Gordhandas Sunderdas Medical College & King Edward Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India.
Dhvani MehtaVidhi Centre for Legal Policy, New Delhi, India.
Yashaswini MittalVidhi Centre for Legal Policy, New Delhi, India.
Urwashi ParmarDepartment of Pharmacology & Therapeutics, Seth Gordhandas Sunderdas Medical College & King Edward Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India.
King Edward Memorial Hospital and Seth G.S. Medical College · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background & objectives: Standard treatment guidelines (STGs) are the cornerstone to therapeutics. Multiple agencies in India develop STGs. This systematic review was conducted to find out STGs available in India, evaluate if these were as per World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations for STGs and compare these with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. Information on legal authority and responsibility for formulating STGs was also sought. Methods: PRISMA guidelines were followed. Publications from PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for STGs using terms 'Standard Treatment Guidelines AND India'. Data from STGs were compiled in excel as per the WHO and authors' criteria for STGs and compared with NICE guidelines. Results: PubMed and Google Scholar search provided 56 publications (out of 1695 search results) mentioning 27 STGs. Google search and replies from authors led us 36 STGs, totalling to 63 STGs. No STG mentioned any specific period of revision, eight STGs were not evidence-based, 55 had some Indian references, 48 STGs were for single disease and the remaining multi-disease, three STGs did not include diagnostic criteria, 16 STGs did not give prescribing information of recommended treatment and 16 STGs provide no referral criteria for patients. Fifty five STGs did not mention level of health care. While NICE is a single legal authority in England and guidelines are as per WHO recommendations for STGs, in India although Acts and rules do not vest authority, National Health Systems Resource Center is generally designated responsible for STGs. Interpretation & conclusions: In India, although there are multiple STGs developed by various authorities and professionals for the same conditions, these fulfil WHO recommendations only partially. Authority with statutory duty collaborating with professional organizations, a standard methodology for adopting international guidelines, Indian data for evidence base, attention to local needs will help in developing better STGs and their acceptance.

Indexed as

Guidelines as TopicReference StandardsHumansIndiaWorld Health OrganizationEvidence-based guidelinesrational use of medicinesSTGs therapeutic guidelinestreatment guidelines

Identifiers

PMID31496524
PMCPMC6755779
OpenAlexW2972051632

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.