SynthesisMedicine2026
A quality appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for herpes zoster and postherpetic neuralgia using the AGREE II instrument: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study systematically assesses the methodological quality of both Western and traditional medicine clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for herpes zoster (HZ) and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument.
methodsA systematic search was conducted up to January 10, 2025 to identify CPGs for HZ or PHN, regardless of whether they were based on Western or traditional medicine. All CPGs addressing diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, prevention, and management were included. Two evaluators independently screened the records and extracted the data. The quality of the CPGs was independently assessed by 5 evaluators using the AGREE II instrument. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to assess inter-rater reliability.
resultsEleven CPGs were included, consisting of ten from Western medicine and 1 from traditional medicine. The AGREE II domain scores were as follows: The "Clarity of Presentation" domain received the highest score (76.2%), whereas "Editorial Independence," "Stakeholder Involvement," and "Applicability" scored below 30%, with "Applicability" receiving the lowest score (10.9%). Inter-rater reliability was excellent, with ICCs for the AGREE II domains ranging from 0.927 to 0.990. Four CPGs were rated as Moderate quality (Recommended with modifications), and 6 CPGs were of Low quality (Not recommended). Among the Western medicine CPGs, JASP 2021 was the only 1 rated as High quality (Recommended), whereas CACMS 2013, the only traditional medicine CPG, was rated as Low quality (Not recommended).
conclusionThe findings reveal considerable variability in quality, with overall low-to-moderate quality observed in the guidelines for HZ and PHN. These results highlight the need to address the domains with consistently low scores identified by the AGREE II instrument by adopting a multidisciplinary approach, strengthening applicability, and ensuring rigor in the development process to improve guideline 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.