Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36016612›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022

Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines on psychological distress of cancer patients using the AGREE II instrument.

Ran Hao, Haoyu Jin, Jinfan Zuo, Rumeng Zhao, Jie Hu, Yixin Qi

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Management of bone health in cancer survivorship: a systematic review of clinical guidelines.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Ran HaoDepartment of Clinical Humanistic Care and Nursing Research Center, School of Nursing, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Haoyu JinDepartment of Clinical Humanistic Care and Nursing Research Center, School of Nursing, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Jinfan ZuoDepartment of Clinical Humanistic Care and Nursing Research Center, School of Nursing, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Rumeng ZhaoDepartment of Clinical Humanistic Care and Nursing Research Center, School of Nursing, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Jie HuDepartment of Science and Technology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.
Yixin QiDepartment of Breast Center, The Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to assess the quality of the clinical practice guidelines on psychological distress among cancer patients and provide users with recommendations for coping with psychological distress. Methods: A systematic search of relevant clinical practice guidelines was undertaken to identify and select the clinical practice guidelines related to psychological distress among cancer patients. Literature databases were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Excerpta Medica Database, the Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature, China Biology Medicine, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WanFang and Weipu Journal Database. The guideline databases include Yimaitong Guidelines Network, National Guideline Clearinghouse, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), New Zealand Guidelines Group, Scottish Intercollegiate GuidelinesNetwork, American Psychological Association, Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario and Cancer Care Ontario (CCO). Four independent reviewers assessed the eligible guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. Results: Six clinical practice guidelines were included and assessed for critical evaluation. The median score for the scope and purpose domain was 71.5% (IQR 64%-77.25%), the stakeholder involvement domain was 65% (IQR 47.5%-74.5%), the rigour of the development domain was 61.5% (IQR 45.5%-85.25%), the clarity of the presentation domain was 91% (IQR 72.25%-94.5%), the applicability domain was 70% (IQR 33%-78.75%), and the editorial independence domain was 48.84% (IQR 61.75%-95%). Four guidelines (ASCO, 2014; Canadian Association of Psychosocial Oncology, 2015; NCCN, 2020, and CCO, 2016) were classified as "recommended," and the remaining (European Palliative Care Research Collaborative and Chinese Psychosocial Oncology Society) were "recommended with modifications," especially in the domains of Stakeholder involvement, rigour of development, and applicability. The inter-rater consistency of each domain showed moderate level (0.52-0.90) analyzing by intraclass correlation. Conclusions: The clinical practice guidelines on psychological distress among cancer patients varied in quality, and there were discrepancies in terms of the recommendations and recommendation grades. These findings could contribute to improving the quality of clinical practice guidelines on psychological distress, and enable the development and implementation of evidence-based guidelines for cancer patients. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42020209204.

Indexed as

AGREE IIcancerclinical practice guidelinepsychological distressquality assessment

Identifiers

PMID36016612
PMCPMC9396033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.