ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2021
Assessing the Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region: A Systematic Review.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Associations between maternal overweight and obesity with cesarean section delivery in Middle East and North Africa region: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and attributable risk.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines on psychological distress of cancer patients using the AGREE II instrument.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Facilitators of Clinical Guideline Implementation in Tertiary Care: A Systematic Literature Review.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026Article
- Revolutionizing healthcare in KSA: A deep dive into clinical practice guideline development and implementation.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2024Article
- Oncology Early-Phase Clinical Trials in the Middle East and North Africa: A Review of the Current Status, Challenges, Opportunities, and Future Directions.Journal of immunotherapy and precision oncology · 2024Review
- A protocol for adapting a clinical practice guideline for the treatment of paediatric asthma for the Egyptian Pediatric Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2024Article
- Newborn and child health national and provincial clinical practice guidelines in South Africa, Nigeria and Malawi: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Advancing guideline quality through country-wide and regional quality assessment of CPGs using AGREE: a scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Assessing Barriers and Facilitators for Implementing Clinical Practice Guidelines in Middle Eastern and North African Region: Delphi Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- A New Era of National Guideline Development in Saudi Arabia.Journal of epidemiology and global health · 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
aimClinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have progressively become a popular tool for making optimal clinical decisions. The literature shows that the poor quality of CPGs can form a barrier against adhering to them, resulting in a suboptimal level of healthcare. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the quality of CPGs in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) Instrument.
methodsThe authors searched in the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases through the Ovid interface on May 25, 2019. Keywords relating to CPGs and MENA countries were combined using Boolean search operators. The search was not limited to specific diseases. The quality of guidelines was appraised by two reviewers independently using the AGREE II Instrument. Discrepancies within a group were resolved through the involvement of a principle investigator.
resultsA total of 61 CPGs were appraised. These guidelines were mainly from Saudi Arabia, and the most covered disease topic was cancer. Among the six domains of the AGREE II Instrument, CPGs scored the highest on clarity of presentation (mean 82%), while the lowest score was granted to the rigor of development domain (mean 28%). This indicates substantial deficiencies in reporting the developmental processes of CPGs and the resources used for the synthesis of evidence.
conclusionFrom this review, it was found that the number of retrieved guidelines published in the MENA region is limited considering the large geographical area of the MENA region. The main domains that have higher quality scores were clarity of presentation and scope and purpose, whereas domains with the lowest scores were rigor of development and applicability. The authors' findings will help policymakers identify areas for improvement in CPGs, which can lead them to implement strategies such as the training of individuals and recruitment of international experts to ultimately develop high-quality CPGs.
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.