ArticleHealth science reports2023
Evaluation of the quality of clinical guidelines for prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in urological surgeries by the AGREE II review instrument.
Article in Health science reports, 2023. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the most common cause of death during the first 30 days after surgery. There is not any study which critically evaluated clinical guidelines related to VTE prophylaxis in urological surgeries. Therefore, in this study, we decided to evaluate related clinical guidelines using the AGREE II instrument to take a positive step towards improving the care of these patients. Methods: The latest version of all available clinical guidelines related to the topic of VTE prophylaxis in urological surgeries until 2021 was searched. Four appraisers, including one urologist, one cardiologist, one epidemiologist, and one MD who had prior knowledge of working with the AGREE II tool and international articles in this field appraised selected clinical guidelines. Using the AGREE II review tool, clinical guidelines were critically evaluated. Then, the score of six domains of AGREE II for each guideline was calculated and compared with each other, and the relationship between the domains was measured by Kendall's correlation test. To determine the reliability of the test, interclass correlation coefficients were calculated for all indicators. Results: Items were rated on a 7-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). NICE, CHEST, and EAU guidelines obtained the highest scores from the Overall Assessment criteria by scoring 6, 5.75, and 5.25, respectively. There was only a correlation between the score of Overall Assessment criterion with "Applicability" domain, with Kendall's correlation coefficient of 0.867 and Conclusion: In this study, NICE, CHEST, and EAU guidelines are suggested as clinical guidelines by obtaining the highest scores from Overall Assessment criterion.
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.