SynthesisMedicine2021
Systematic review of methodology and reporting quality of global guidelines on fever in children.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the global clinical practice guidelines on fever in children. We also aimed to select a guideline with good methodology and reporting quality to provide scientific reference for diagnosis and treatment of fever in children.
methodsThe Chinese and English databases Embase, PubMed, Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang database, clinical guides, and the website of the Department of Public Health Administration were retrieved up to January 2020. The clinical practice guidelines on fever in children were included. The AGREE II instrument and Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare statement were used to evaluate the methodology and reporting quality of the guidelines.
resultsEight clinical guidelines for fever in children were included. Methodological quality assessment showed that the recommendation level of ISP, South Africa, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, China, and American College of Emergency Physicians were grade B (recommended with modification), while that of American Academy of Pediatrics, New South Wales, and South Australia was grade C recommendation (not recommended). No grade A recommendation guideline was found. The reporting quality from higher to lower was National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the Chinese guideline, American College of Emergency Physicians, ISP, South Africa, New South Wales, South Australia, and American Academy of Pediatrics. The guideline recommendations were similar in various countries, but they were slightly different in various aspects, including body temperature measurement and the timing of drug administration.
conclusionThere are limitations in the methodology and reporting quality of all eight global guidelines on fever in children. For future development of these guidelines, attention should be paid to improving applicability of the guidelines in terms of methodology. Additionally, the principles and explanations for formation of recommendations should be described, as well as the limitations of the reporting guideline in detail in terms of the reporting quality. Treatments of fever in children are similar in different countries, but there are still differences that require further research.
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.