We have located links that may give you full text access.
Series: Clinical Epidemiology in South Africa. Paper 2: Quality and reporting standards of South African primary care clinical practice guidelines.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2017 March
OBJECTIVES: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) development has evolved over the past decade, with greater emphasis now being placed on transparency, rigor of development, and reporting standards. Our evaluation assesses the quality of the guideline development processes and reporting of selected South African primary care (PC) CPGs.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: CPGs were iteratively identified by two authors, seeking CPGs reflecting common conditions with which patients present in South African PC settings. CPGs could address diagnosis, treatment, or clinical management. Each CPG was independently appraised by two reviewers using the AGREE II (Appraisal of Guideline REsearch and Evaluation) quality checklist, and the weighted scoring algorithm to calculate scores for the six domains.
RESULTS: We included 16 CPGs from the National Department of Health and clinical professional associations. Overall, the domains of rigor of development, editorial independence, and applicability had the lowest median scores (0, 4%, and 13%, respectively). Clarity of presentation reported the highest median score (69%), with seven CPGs scoring above 70%.
CONCLUSIONS: The methodological quality of the selected South African PC CPGs was generally poor to moderate. Concerted efforts should be made to ensure that transparent, rigorous, and up-to-date evidence assessments are conducted and well reported by CPG developers.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: CPGs were iteratively identified by two authors, seeking CPGs reflecting common conditions with which patients present in South African PC settings. CPGs could address diagnosis, treatment, or clinical management. Each CPG was independently appraised by two reviewers using the AGREE II (Appraisal of Guideline REsearch and Evaluation) quality checklist, and the weighted scoring algorithm to calculate scores for the six domains.
RESULTS: We included 16 CPGs from the National Department of Health and clinical professional associations. Overall, the domains of rigor of development, editorial independence, and applicability had the lowest median scores (0, 4%, and 13%, respectively). Clarity of presentation reported the highest median score (69%), with seven CPGs scoring above 70%.
CONCLUSIONS: The methodological quality of the selected South African PC CPGs was generally poor to moderate. Concerted efforts should be made to ensure that transparent, rigorous, and up-to-date evidence assessments are conducted and well reported by CPG developers.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Executive Summary: State-of-the-Art Review: Unintended Consequences: Risk of Opportunistic Infections Associated with Long-term Glucocorticoid Therapies in Adults.Clinical Infectious Diseases 2024 April 11
Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemias: Classifications, Pathophysiology, Diagnoses and Management.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 13
Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.Epilepsia 2024 April 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app