Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic liver cancer.

<h4>Objectives</h4>To assess the quality of the currently available clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for hepatocellular carcinoma, and provide a reference for clinicians in selecting the best available clinical protocols.<h4>Methods</h4>The databases of PubMed, MEDLINE, We...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Yingqiang Wang, Qianqian Luo, Youping Li, Haiqing Wang, Shaolin Deng, Shiyou Wei, Xianglian Li
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/bf9b9ad8b9bc45b3868d04b7ee4ad128
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:bf9b9ad8b9bc45b3868d04b7ee4ad128
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:bf9b9ad8b9bc45b3868d04b7ee4ad1282021-11-25T06:05:27ZQuality assessment of clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic liver cancer.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0103939https://doaj.org/article/bf9b9ad8b9bc45b3868d04b7ee4ad1282014-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/25105961/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Objectives</h4>To assess the quality of the currently available clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for hepatocellular carcinoma, and provide a reference for clinicians in selecting the best available clinical protocols.<h4>Methods</h4>The databases of PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Literature database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang, and relevant CPGs websites were systematically searched through March 2014. CPGs quality was appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, and data analysis was performed using SPSS 13.0 software.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 20 evidence-based and 20 expert consensus-based guidelines were included. The mean percentage of the domain scores were: scope and purpose 83% (95% confidence interval (CI), 81% to 86%), clarity of presentation 79% (95% CI, 73% to 86%), stakeholder involvement 39% (95% CI, 30% to 49%), editorial independence 58% (95% CI, 52% to 64%), rigor of development 39% (95% CI, 31% to 46%), and applicability 16% (95% CI, 10% to 23%). Evidence-based guidelines were superior to those established by consensus for the domains of rigor of development (p<0.001), clarity of presentation (p = 0.01) and applicability (p = 0.021).<h4>Conclusions</h4>The overall methodological quality of CPGs for hepatocellular carcinoma and metastatic liver cancer is moderate, with poor applicability and potential conflict of interest issues. The evidence-based guidelines has become mainstream for high quality CPGs development; however, there is still need to further increase the transparency and quality of evidence rating, as well as the recommendation process, and to address potential conflict of interest.Yingqiang WangQianqian LuoYouping LiHaiqing WangShaolin DengShiyou WeiXianglian LiPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 9, Iss 8, p e103939 (2014)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Yingqiang Wang Qianqian Luo Youping Li Haiqing Wang Shaolin Deng Shiyou Wei Xianglian Li Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic liver cancer.
description	<h4>Objectives</h4>To assess the quality of the currently available clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for hepatocellular carcinoma, and provide a reference for clinicians in selecting the best available clinical protocols.<h4>Methods</h4>The databases of PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Literature database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang, and relevant CPGs websites were systematically searched through March 2014. CPGs quality was appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, and data analysis was performed using SPSS 13.0 software.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 20 evidence-based and 20 expert consensus-based guidelines were included. The mean percentage of the domain scores were: scope and purpose 83% (95% confidence interval (CI), 81% to 86%), clarity of presentation 79% (95% CI, 73% to 86%), stakeholder involvement 39% (95% CI, 30% to 49%), editorial independence 58% (95% CI, 52% to 64%), rigor of development 39% (95% CI, 31% to 46%), and applicability 16% (95% CI, 10% to 23%). Evidence-based guidelines were superior to those established by consensus for the domains of rigor of development (p<0.001), clarity of presentation (p = 0.01) and applicability (p = 0.021).<h4>Conclusions</h4>The overall methodological quality of CPGs for hepatocellular carcinoma and metastatic liver cancer is moderate, with poor applicability and potential conflict of interest issues. The evidence-based guidelines has become mainstream for high quality CPGs development; however, there is still need to further increase the transparency and quality of evidence rating, as well as the recommendation process, and to address potential conflict of interest.
format	article
author	Yingqiang Wang Qianqian Luo Youping Li Haiqing Wang Shaolin Deng Shiyou Wei Xianglian Li
author_facet	Yingqiang Wang Qianqian Luo Youping Li Haiqing Wang Shaolin Deng Shiyou Wei Xianglian Li
author_sort	Yingqiang Wang
title	Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic liver cancer.
title_short	Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic liver cancer.
title_full	Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic liver cancer.
title_fullStr	Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic liver cancer.
title_full_unstemmed	Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic liver cancer.
title_sort	quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic liver cancer.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2014
url	https://doaj.org/article/bf9b9ad8b9bc45b3868d04b7ee4ad128
work_keys_str_mv	AT yingqiangwang qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonthetreatmentofhepatocellularcarcinomaormetastaticlivercancer AT qianqianluo qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonthetreatmentofhepatocellularcarcinomaormetastaticlivercancer AT youpingli qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonthetreatmentofhepatocellularcarcinomaormetastaticlivercancer AT haiqingwang qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonthetreatmentofhepatocellularcarcinomaormetastaticlivercancer AT shaolindeng qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonthetreatmentofhepatocellularcarcinomaormetastaticlivercancer AT shiyouwei qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonthetreatmentofhepatocellularcarcinomaormetastaticlivercancer AT xianglianli qualityassessmentofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonthetreatmentofhepatocellularcarcinomaormetastaticlivercancer
_version_	1718414245009293312

Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma or metastatic liver cancer.

Ejemplares similares