Erratum to systematic review and critical evaluation of quality of clinical practice guidelines on the management of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Di Girolamo R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9355748 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Erratum to systematic review and critical evaluation of quality of clinical practice guidelines on the management of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy.
Di Girolamo Raffaella R Khalil Asma A Rizzo Giuseppe G Capannolo Giulia G Buca Danilo D Liberati Marco M Acharya Ganesh G Odibo Anthony O AO D'Antonio Francesco F
American journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM 20220806 6
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo systematically identify and critically assess the quality of clinical practice guidelines for the management of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy.Data sourcesMedline, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science databases were searched until February 15, 2022.Study eligibility criteriaInclusion criteria were clinical practice guidelines on the management of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy. The risk of bias and quality assessments of the included clinical practice guidelines were performed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II tool, which is considered the gold standard for quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines. To define a clinical practice guideline as of good quality, we adopted the cutoff score proposed by Amer et al: if the overall clinical practice guideline score was >60%, it was recommended.MethodsThe following clinical points related to the management of pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection were addressed: criteria for maternal hospitalization, recommendations for follow-up fetal growth scan, specific recommendations against invasive procedures, management of labor, timing of delivery, postpartum care, and vaccination strategy.ResultsA total of 28 clinical practice guidelines were included. All recommended hospitalization only for severe disease; 46.1% (6/13) suggested a fetal growth scan after SARS-CoV-2 infection, whereas 23.1% (3/13) did not support this practice. Thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin was recommended in symptomatic women by 77.1% (7/9) of the clinical practice guidelines. None of the guidelines recommended administering corticosteroids only for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in preterm gestation, unless specific obstetrical indication exists. Elective induction of labor from 39 weeks of gestation was suggested by 18.1% (2/11) of the clinical practice guidelines included in the present review, whereas 45.4% (5/11) did not recommend elective induction unless other obstetrical indications coexisted. There were 27% (3/11) of clinical practice guidelines that suggested shortening of the second stage of labor, and active pushing was supported by 18.1% (2/11). There was general agreement among the clinical practice guidelines in not recommending cesarean delivery only for the presence of maternal infection and in recommending vaccine boosters at least 6 months after the primary series of vaccination. The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II standardized domain scores for the first overall assessment of clinical practice guidelines had a mean of 50% (standard deviation±21.82%), and 9 clinical practice guidelines scored >60%.ConclusionA significant heterogeneity was found in some of the main aspects of the management of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy, as reported by the published clinical practice guidelines.
| S-EPMC9057927 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: To report the quality and clinical heterogeneity of the published clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on nutrition in pregnancy. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science databases were searched. The following aspects related to nutrition in pregnancy were addressed: specific requirements during pregnancy, description of a balanced diet, weight gain, prevention of food-borne, nutrition in peculiar sub-groups of women, and maternal or perinatal outcomes. The assessment of the risk of bias and quality assessment of the included CPGs were performed using “The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE II)” tool divided in six quality domains: scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, editorial independence. Mean ± standard deviation (SD) was used to summarize the scores across all the guidelines per domain. The quality of each guideline was computed using the scoring system proposed by Amer et al. A cut-off of >60% was sued to define a CGP as recommended. Results: Eighteen CPGs were included. There was a substantial heterogeneity in the recommended dose for vitamins, folic acid, and micronutrient intake during pregnancy among the different published CPGs. 27.8% (5/18) of the CPGs recommended a daily intake of folic acid of 200 mcg, 38.8% (7/18) 400 mcg, 16.7% (3/18) 600 mcg while the remaining CPGs suggested dose between 400 and 600−800 mc per day. Adequate maternal hydration was advocated in the large majority of included CPGs, but a specific amount of water intake was not reported in 83.3% (15/18) cases. There was also significant heterogeneity in various other aspects of nutrition recommendation among the different CPGs, including gestational weight gain (55.5%), prevention of food-borne diseases in pregnancy (72.2%), nutrition in particular groups of pregnant women (83.3%), maternal and perinatal outcomes (72.2%). The AGREE II standardized domain scores for the first overall assessment (OA1) had a mean of 65% but only half scored more than 60%. Conclusion: The published CPGs on nutrition in pregnancy show an overall good methodology, but also a substantial heterogeneity as regard as different major aspects on nutrition in pregnancy.
| S-EPMC9778102 | biostudies-literature
Project description:[This corrects the article on p. 34 in vol. 59.].
| S-EPMC5547881 | biostudies-other
Project description:PurposeSignificant concerns exist regarding the content and reliability of oncology clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). The Institute of Medicine (IOM) report "Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust" established standards for developing trustworthy CPGs. By using these standards as a benchmark, we sought to evaluate recent oncology guidelines.MethodsCPGs and consensus statements addressing the screening, evaluation, or management of the four leading causes of cancer-related mortality in the United States (lung, breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers) published between January 2005 and December 2010 were identified. A standardized scoring system based on the eight IOM standards was used to critically evaluate the methodology, content, and disclosure policies of CPGs. All CPGs were given two scores; points were awarded for eight standards and 20 subcriteria.ResultsNo CPG fully met all the IOM standards. The average overall scores were 2.75 of 8 possible standards and 8.24 of 20 possible subcriteria. Less than half the CPGs were based on a systematic review. Only half the CPG panels addressed conflicts of interest. Most did not comply with standards for inclusion of patient and public involvement in the development or review process, nor did they specify their process for updating. CPGs were most consistent with IOM standards for transparency, articulation of recommendations, and use of external review.ConclusionThe vast majority of oncology CPGs fail to meet the IOM standards for trustworthy guidelines. On the basis of these results, there is still much to be done to make guidelines as methodologically sound and evidence-based as possible.
| S-EPMC5073383 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Several guidelines and expert consensuses have been developed for management of primary aldosteronism (PA). It is important to understand the detailed recommendations and quality of these guidelines to help physicians make informed and reliable decision. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and three websites were searched for practice guidelines or consensuses of PA from inception to January 24, 2019. We summarized the major recommendations on the management of PA from these guidelines and consensuses. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II was used to assess quality of the included guidelines and consensuses. Results: We identified three clinical practice guidelines and three consensus statements. Most of the recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of PA from these guidelines and consensuses were consistent. Some minor conflicts were recorded for patient's screen and confirmation test. All included guideline documents have a good quality (score, >70%) on the scope and purpose (mean score, 81.02%) and clarity of presentation of the recommendations (mean score, 86.88%). However, the reporting for the stakeholder involvement (mean score, 54.32%) and applicability (mean score, 47.92%) were insufficient. There was an insufficient rigorousness in most of the guideline documents (mean score, 45.56%) on the development process. The Endocrine Society practice guideline 2016 ranked highest in quality (score, 81.13%). Conclusions: Existing guideline documents provided valuable recommendations on the management of PA, but further efforts are needed to improve the methodological quality. The Endocrine Society practice guideline 2016 was recommended for use.
| S-EPMC7214671 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to assess the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) associated with the management of poststroke sensory loss and develop an algorithm for health professionals.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review for relevant CPGs published between 2017 and 2022 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Checklist. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument was used to assess methodological quality. Recommendations for managing poststroke sensory loss from high and average-quality CPGs were summarised and developed into an algorithm.ResultsFirst, 1458 records were identified from the database searches and other sources. Finally, four CPGs were included: three were rated as high quality and one as average quality. Twenty-two recommendations were summarised from these CPGs and used to develop a draft algorithm. Then, we revised the draft algorithm developed by the authors based on expert feedback to form the final version.ConclusionsThe four CPGs included in this study had good quality. Based on these CPGs, we developed an algorithm to facilitate health professionals' adherence to CPGs and contribute to evidence-based medicine. In the future, more high-quality CPGs are required to give further scientific and convincing evidence to manage poststroke sensory loss.
| S-EPMC10660658 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The morbidity and mortality of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are still increasing. This study aimed to assess the quality of relevant COVID-19 clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and to compare the similarities and differences between recommendations. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted using electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) and representative guidelines repositories from December 1, 2019, to August 11, 2020 (updated to April 5, 2021), to obtain eligible CPGs. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used to evaluate the quality of CPGs. Four authors extracted relevant information and completed data extraction forms. All data were analyzed using R version 3.6.0 software. Results: In total, 39 CPGs were identified and the quality was not encouragingly high. The median score (interquartile range, IQR) of every domain from AGREE II for evidence-based CPGs (EB-CPGs) versus (vs.) consensus-based CPG (CB-CPGs) was 81.94% (75.00-84.72) vs. 58.33% (52.78-68.06) in scope and purpose, 59.72% (38.89-75.00) vs. 36.11% (33.33-36.11) in stakeholder involvement, 64.58% (32.29-71.88) vs. 22.92% (16.67-26.56) in rigor of development, 75.00% (52.78-86.81) vs. 52.78% (50.00-63.89) in clarity of presentation, 40.63% (22.40-62.50) vs. 20.83% (13.54-25.00) in applicability, and 58.33% (50.00-100.00) vs. 50.00% (50.00-77.08) in editorial independence, respectively. The methodological quality of EB-CPGs were significantly superior to the CB-CPGs in the majority of domains (P < 0.05). There was no agreement on diagnosis criteria of COVID-19. But a few guidelines show Remdesivir may be beneficial for the patients, hydroxychloroquine +/- azithromycin may not, and there were more consistent suggestions regarding discharge management. For instance, after discharge, isolation management and health status monitoring may be continued. Conclusions: In general, the methodological quality of EB-CPGs is greater than CB-CPGs. However, it is still required to be further improved. Besides, the consistency of COVID-19 recommendations on topics such as diagnosis criteria is different. Of them, hydroxychloroquine +/- azithromycin may be not beneficial to treat patients with COVID-19, but remdesivir may be a favorable risk-benefit in severe COVID-19 infection; isolation management and health status monitoring after discharge may be still necessary. Chemoprophylaxis, including SARS-CoV 2 vaccines and antiviral drugs of COVID-19, still require more trials to confirm this.
| S-EPMC8248791 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionClinical practice guidelines (CPGs) contain recommendations for specific clinical circumstances, including maternal malnutrition. This study aimed to identify the CPGs that provide recommendations for preventing, diagnosing, and treating women's malnutrition. Additionally, we sought to assess the methodological quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument.MethodsAn online search for CPGs was performed, looking for those that contained lifestyle and nutritional recommendations to prevent, diagnose and treat malnutrition in women during the preconception period using PubMed and different websites. The reviewers utilized the AGREE II instrument to appraise the quality of the CPGs. We defined high-quality guidelines with a final score of > 70%.ResultsThe titles and abstracts from 30 guidelines were screened for inclusion, of which 20 guidelines were fully reviewed for quality assessment. The overall quality assessment of CPGs was 73%, and only 55% reached a high-quality classification. The domains in the guidelines classified as high-quality had the highest scores in "Scope and Purpose" and "Clarity of Presentation" with a median of 98.5 and 93%, respectively.DiscussionFurther assessment is needed to improve the quality of the guidelines, which is an opportunity to strengthen them, especially in the domains with the lowest scores.
| S-EPMC10621738 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to evaluate the current clinical practice patterns regarding the utilization of "Urolithiasis Guidelines" in Turkey and to identify critical factors influencing their application by urologists.MethodsThe study targeted practicing urologists in Turkey, primarily those involved in the management of urolithiasis, to assess their perspectives and experiences regarding the clinical application of established guidelines. A total of 415 urology specialists were invited to participate in a survey-based study conducted via Google Forms. Participation was voluntary, and 65.08% of the invited urologists completed the survey.ResultsAmong the respondents, 84.7% reported utilizing the available guidelines in their routine clinical practice, with varying frequencies of reference. The primary motivations for guideline use were the prevention of potential complications and the avoidance of legal risks, as indicated by 90.5% of respondents. While 56.9% of participants adhered to the guidelines as a clinically standardized practice, 41.6% reported applying the recommendations on a case-by-case basis. Notably, 41.0% of respondents emphasized the need for locally adapted versions of guideline texts. Additionally, nearly half of the participants reported receiving no formal education or training on the significance, content, and practical application of these guidelines. Furthermore, 12.7% expressed skepticism about the evidence-based foundation of the guidelines, questioning whether the recommendations were derived from rigorously conducted studies.ConclusionThe available urolithiasis guidelines are recognized as valuable resources offering key recommendations for the effective and safe management of urolithiasis. However, findings from this survey highlight significant variability in clinical practice patterns due to local conditions and the individual experience and attitudes of practicing urologists. The application of guideline recommendations is further influenced by perceptions regarding their development, content, and practicality. Insights gathered from this study may contribute to improving the preparation, dissemination, and implementation of urolithiasis guidelines, particularly in adapting them to local clinical settings.
| S-EPMC11790800 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have long served as an essential tool for clinicians to rationalize their treatment in practice. However, the quality of guidelines varies greatly. The present study aimed to analyze high-quality CPGs of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and highlight the potential for further improvement.MethodsThree guideline developers' websites, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, as well as a public search engine, Google Scholar, were searched to retrieve CPGs regarding the management of IPF. The methodology and reporting quality of retrieved CPGs were assessed using the validated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Instrument II (AGREE II) and Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) checklist.ResultsTwelve IPF CPGs were reviewed, among which 7 (58.3%) were considered as "recommended" and 1 (8.3%) as "recommended with modifications". Among the 6 domains of AGREE II, scope and purpose (70.99%) and clarity of presentation (68.06%) were considered to be the fields in which CPGs performed best, evidenced by the highest mean AGREE II scores. The domains in which the reviewed CPGs received the lowest mean scores were rigor of development (50.87%) and applicability (34.14%). The intraclass correlation coefficient scores were excellent in each domain. The basic information domain received the highest overall reporting rate in the 7 domains of the RIGHT checklist; the other 6 domains had a full reporting rate of <50%. Eight items had a satisfactory level of reporting, whereas 14 items had poor reporting according to the RIGHT checklist. Correlation analysis revealed a highly positive correlation between the methodology and reporting quality of CPGs for IPF (r=0.872).ConclusionsThe methodological quality of selected IPF CPGs fluctuated greatly, and the full reporting rate was found to be quite low in some domains. In the future, we should focus not only on improving the methodological quality in the development of guidelines, but also on the reporting quality of guidelines.
| S-EPMC7723592 | biostudies-literature