Evidence mapPaperPMID 33028233Full record

SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2020

Quality assessment of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the management of pregnant women with sickle cell disease using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review.

Yasser S Amer, Yasser Sabr, Ghada M ElGohary, Amer M Altaki, Osamah T Khojah, Ahmed El-Malky, Musa F Alzahrani

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Yasser S AmerClinical Practice Guidelines Unit, Quality Management Department, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. yamer@ksu.edu.sa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4097-2317
Yasser SabrDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Ghada M ElGoharyUniversity Oncology Center, King Saud University Medical City, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Amer M AltakiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Osamah T KhojahPathology Department, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Ahmed El-MalkyMorbidity and Mortality Unit, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Musa F AlzahraniDepartment of Medicine, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
King Saud University · SAKing Saud Medical City · SAAin Shams University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe management of pregnant women with sickle cell disease (SCD) poses a major challenge for maternal healthcare services owing to the potential for complications associated with morbidity and mortality. Trustworthy evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have a major impact on the positive outcomes of appropriate healthcare. The objective of this study was to critically appraise the quality of recent CPGs for SCD in pregnant women.

methodsClinical questions were identified and the relevant CPG and bibliographic databases were searched and screened for eligible CPGs. Each CPG was appraised by four independent appraisers using the AGREE II Instrument. Inter-rater analysis was conducted.

resultsFour eligible CPGs were appraised: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), and Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). Among them, the overall assessments of three CPGs (NICE, RCOG, NHLBI) scored greater than 70%; these findings were consistent with the high scores in the six domains of AGREE II, including:[1] scope and purpose,[2] stakeholder involvement,[3] rigor of development,[4] clarity of presentation,[5] applicability, and [6] editorial independence domains. Domain [3] scored (90%, 73%, 71%), domain [5] (90%, 46%, 47%), and domain [6] (71%, 77%, 52%) for NICE, RCOG, and NHLBI, respectively. Overall, the clinical recommendations were not significantly different between the included CPGs.

conclusionsThree evidence-based CPGs presented superior methodological quality. NICE demonstrated the highest quality followed by RCOG and NHLBI and all three CPGs were recommended for use in practice.

Indexed as

Anemia, Sickle CellEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleHumansObstetricsPractice Guidelines as TopicPregnancyPregnancy Complications, HematologicAGREE II instrumentpractice guidelinespregnancyquality assessmentSickle cell disease

Identifiers

PMID33028233
PMCPMC7539517
OpenAlexW3092570575

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.