ArticleJournal of evidence-based medicine2020
An instrument for evaluating the clinical applicability of guidelines.
Article in Journal of evidence-based medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- From guidelines to clinical practice in care for ischaemic stroke patients: A systematic review and expert opinion.European journal of neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Reliability and clinical applicability of lower limp strength using an enhanced paper grip strength.European journal of translational myology · 2023Article
- Exploring the barriers for guideline-based management of dementia amongst consultants in Kerala, South India: A qualitative study.The Indian journal of medical research · 2022Article
- Appraising clinical applicability of studies: mapping and synthesis of current frameworks, and proposal of the FrACAS framework and VICORT checklist.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- An instrument for evaluating the clinical applicability of guidelines.Journal of evidence-based medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo establish an instrument for evaluating the clinical applicability of guidelines from the guideline-users' perspective.
methodsWe established this instrument through forming a working group, forming an initial list of items based on a qualitative systematic review, establishing initial instrument via two rounds of modified Delphi surveys, and external review the initial instrument.
resultsThe results of modified Delphi surveys establishing appraisal aspects, appraisal items, general information of the evaluator met the preset requirements. The instrument includes three parts: general information of the evaluator (12 items), evaluation of clinical applicability (12 items, including items on the availability, readability, acceptability, feasibility, and overall applicability of guideline), and scoring scheme.
conclusionsThe instrument for evaluating the clinical applicability of guidelines from the guideline-users' perspective provides criteria and methods for improving the clinical applicability of guidelines during development and updating.
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.