ReviewNutrients2022
Quality Appraisal of Nutritional Guidelines to Prevent, Diagnose, and Treat Malnutrition in All Its Forms during Pregnancy.
Review in Nutrients, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quality appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for the management of Dysphagia after acute stroke.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Pooled it
- A scoping review and critical evaluation of the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines on nutrition in the preconception.Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This work aimed to identify clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) that include recommendations for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of women’s malnutrition during pregnancy and to evaluate the quality of these guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. We conducted a literature review using PubMed and different websites from January 2009 to February 2021. The quality of the CPGs was independently assessed by reviewers using the AGREE II instrument, which defines guidelines scoring >70% in the overall assessment as “high quality”. The analysis included 43 guidelines. Among the main findings, we identified that only half of the CPGs (51.1%) obtained a final “high quality” evaluation. AGREE II results varied widely across domains and categories. The two domains that obtained the highest scores were scope and purpose with 88.3% (range 39 to 100%) and clarity of presentation with 87.2% (range 25 to 100%). Among the “high quality” CPGs, the best scores were achieved by the three guidelines published by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Due to the importance of maternal nutrition in pregnancy, it is essential to join forces to improve the quality of the guidelines, especially in CPGs that do not meet the reference standards for quality.
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.