ArticleMedicine2021
Quality assessment of traditional and conventional medicine clinical practice guidelines for osteoporosis.
Article in Medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Auraptene ameliorates osteoporosis by inhibiting RANKL/NFATc1 pathway-mediated bone resorption based on network pharmacology and experimental evaluation.Bone & joint research · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
abstractNumerous studies have reported the variable quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) across various domains. The aim of this study was to systematically assess the quality, methodology, and consistency of recently developed traditional and conventional medicine CPGs that focus on the management of osteoporosis and provide helpful recommendations for patients with osteoporosis.From June 2020 to July 2020, CPGs with osteoporosis targeting any age were systematically retrieved. All CPGs of traditional and conventional medicine related to the assessment and diagnosis, management, and clinical therapeutic and pharmacological recommendations with osteoporosis were eligible for inclusion in this study. The excluded documents included guidelines without recommendations, secondary publications derived from CPGs, consensus statements, or consensus conferences based on the opinion of panelists, systematic reviews, editorials, clinical trials, and single-author documents. The quality of CPGs was independently examined by three assessors using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. AGREE II consists of 6 domains; scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, and editorial independence. Consequently, selected CPGs were graded as recommended (A), recommended with modifications (B), or not recommended (C), and the specific treatments and preventive recommendations in the CPGs were summarized.The quality of the 15 CPGs assessed varied across the AGREE II domains. The overall quality ranged from 3.0 to 6.0 out of 7. The domain that had the highest scores were "clarity of presentation," with a mean value of 69.0% (range 46%-83%); "editorial independence" had the lowest score of 30.2% (range 0%-75%). The conventional CPGs focused on pharmacological treatments, calcium and vitamin D intake, and prevention, while the traditional CPGs consistently emphasized on herbal medicine and non-pharmaceutical treatment and management.Further development of CPGs will require improvement in domains where low item scores have been obtained in the quality assessment in this present study. Further research is needed on alternative modalities for osteoporosis, especially complementary approaches, and higher quality CPGs are needed to facilitate evidence-based clinical practice.
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.