SynthesisJournal of clinical epidemiology2021
The methodological quality is insufficient in clinical practice guidelines in the context of COVID-19: systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adherence of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pharmacologic Treatments of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 to Trustworthy Standards: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2021Pooled it
- Methodological assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on COVID-19: A meta-epidemiological study.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2021Pooled it
- The Semmelweis Framework: structuring evidence foundations and expert opinion in clinical practice guidelines.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Defining expert opinion in clinical guidelines: insights from 98 scientific societies - a methodological study.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Utilization of expert opinion in infectious diseases clinical guidelines-A meta-epidemiological study.PloS one · 2024Article
- Capturing Emerging Experiential Knowledge for Vaccination Guidelines Through Natural Language Processing: Proof-of-Concept Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Efficiency, Economy and Excellence: Experimental Exploration of Evidence-based Guideline Development in Resource-Constrained Settings.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2023Review
- Automated Monitoring of Adherence to Evidenced-Based Clinical Guideline Recommendations: Design and Implementation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- A Fuzzy Hybrid MCDM Approach for Assessing the Emergency Department Performance during the COVID-19 Outbreak.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the quality of COVID-19 guidance documents in anaesthesia using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument.British journal of anaesthesia · 2022Review
- Possible long COVID healthcare pathways: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- COVID-19 vaccine guidelines was numerous in quantity but many lack transparent reporting of methodological practices.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2022Article
- Evaluation of biochemical characteristics of 183 COVID-19 patients: A retrospective study.Gene reports · 2022Article
- Guidelines developed under pressure. The case of the COVID-19 low-quality "rapid" guidelines and potential solutions.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2022Article
- The methodology of a "living" COVID-19 registry development in a clinical context.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2022Article
- Analysis of COVID-19 Guideline Quality and Change of Recommendations: A Systematic Review.Health data science · 2021Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 16 institutions in 10 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe number of published clinical practice guidelines related to COVID-19 has rapidly increased. This study explored if basic methodological standards of guideline development have been met in the published clinical practice guidelines related to COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN AND
settingRapid systematic review from February 1 until April 27, 2020 using MEDLINE [PubMed], CINAHL [Ebsco], Trip and manual search, including all types of healthcare workers providing any kind of healthcare to any patient population in any setting.
resultsThere were 1342 titles screened and 188 guidelines included. The highest average AGREE II domain score was 89% for scope and purpose, the lowest for rigor of development (25%). Only eight guidelines (4%) were based on a systematic literature search and a structured consensus process by representative experts (classified as the highest methodological quality). The majority (156; 83%) was solely built on an informal expert consensus. A process for regular updates was described in 27 guidelines (14%). Patients were included in the development of only one guideline.
conclusionDespite clear scope, most publications fell short of basic methodological standards of guideline development. Clinicians should use guidelines that include up-to-date information, were informed by stakeholder involvement, and employed rigorous methodologies.
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.