SynthesisFrontiers in public health2022
Quality Assessment of the Clinical Practice Guidelines of Ostomy Care Based on the AGREE II Instrument.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Acupuncture recommendations for migraine in headache treatment guidelines: a systematic review.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2025Pooled it
- Quality appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a systematic review using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation (AGREE II) instrument.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Characteristics of Interventional Trials for Patients Living With Intestinal Stoma Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov With a Focus on Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Clinical practice guidelines for the nutrition of colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To assess the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) of ostomy care, and to analyze the status quo and challenges of guideline development. Methods: CPGs of ostomy care were systematically searched in relevant guideline websites and electronic databases, including PubMed, ProQuest, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, WANFANG, and SinoMed, from January 1, 2012, to November 24, 2021. Two appraisers used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation, 2nd edition (AGREE II) instrument to assess the quality of the included CPGs independently and objectively. The consistency of assessment was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Results: A total of 5 CPGs relevant to ostomy care were assessed by AGREE II and the general quality of them was good. There were two CPGs of grade A and three CPGs of grade B. The domain scope and purpose (87.78%) had the highest scores, followed by the clarity of presentation (87.22%), the rigor of development (69.17%), stakeholder involvement (68.33%), and editorial independence (65.00%), and the lowest was applicability (55.42%). The overall assessment score was 5.40. All the ICCs for the AGREE II appraisal conducted by the two appraisers were >0.75. Conclusions: The five CPGs of ostomy care have the potential to be adopted in clinical practice. However, they still have some room for improvement, especially in the applicability domain. The development of ostomy care CPGs should follow the evidence-based progress and methodology of guideline formulation specifications while considering the effects of the CPGs and the practical issues.
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.