SynthesisBMC health services research2019
A technical appraisal of guidelines for the management of skin rash in patients on chemotherapy and targeted therapy.
Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Molecular aspects of Chikungunya virus infections in cancer patients.Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSkin rash remains one of the most prevalent and troublesome clinical problems experienced by patients on chemotherapy and targeted therapy. To ensure high-quality care, guidelines are seen as the best guidance. Considering the quality of guidelines varies greatly, a systematical appraisal of the methodological quality of guidelines for the management of skin rash in patients on chemotherapeutic drugs and targeted anticancer therapies was undertaken, in order to identify appropriate ones for healthcare professionals.
methodsA systematic search of databases and Internet was conducted to obtain pertinent guidelines. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility of guidelines according to the inclusion criteria. Then the guidelines included were appraised by three researchers with the methodological quality of eligible guideline using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREEII).
resultsTotally nineteen guidelines met the inclusion criteria. The quality ranged from good to acceptable in scope and purpose (mean: 78.80%, range: 66.67-94.44%) and clarity of presentation domains (mean: 85.38%, 75.00-91.67%), but not in stakeholder involvement (mean: 50.15%, range: 36.11-75.00%), rigor of development (mean: 23.65%, range: 6.25-70.83%), applicability (mean: 23.96%, range: 4.17-52.08%), and editorial independence domains (mean: 45.18%, range: 0.00-87.50%). Overall, two guidelines were classified as "recommended".
conclusionsOnly two guidelines were recommended to manage skin rash in patients on chemotherapy and targeted therapies, most guidelines issued were of low to moderate quality. Thus, more attention should be paid to the methodological quality of guideline development in this field.
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.