SynthesisMedicine2020
Reporting quality of polycystic ovary syndrome practice guidelines based on the RIGHT checklist.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPolycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a prevalent endocrine disorder involving hyperandrogenism, menstrual disorder, metabolic problems, infertility, obesity, and acne. The main aim of this study was to assess the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in the field of PCOS to provide a reporting specification for this study.
methodsWe evaluated the reporting quality of clinical guidelines of PCOS using the Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) checklist. Nine databases and 3 medical associations were searched. These included Medline, Embase, PubMed, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Guidelines International Network (GIN), National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC), China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang and Chinese Science, and Technology Journal Database (VIP). Three medical associations included the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Two independent authors assessed the reporting quality of PCOS CPGs by the RIGHT checklist, and Spearman's correlation was used to assess inter-rater reliability.
resultsTwelve PCOS CPGs were included. On average, 20.0 (57.1%) of the 35 items in the RIGHT checklist were reported. All items were fully reported by one of these CPGs. The number of reported items ranged from 10 (28.6%) to 35 (100%). Overall, 16.7%, 66.7%, and 16.7% of included guidelines were of high, medium, and low quality, respectively. The reporting proportions of the 7 domains (i.e., Basic information, Background, Evidence, Recommendations, Reviewand quality assurance, Funding and declaration and management of interests, and Other information) in the RIGHT checklist were 62.0%, 69.1%, 53.3%, 60.7%, 33.3%, 31.2%, and 69.4%, respectively.
conclusionsThe evaluation of these CPGs by the RIGHT checklist revealed that the reporting quality varied among guidelines. Low quality items were the processes of evidence decision and the declaration of funding in most included CPGs. Guideline developers should pay more attention to these items to disseminate and implement better guidelines in near future. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: registration at PROSPERO CRD42020163435.
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.