Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33313150›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2020

Critical appraisal of the quality of clinical practice guidelines for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

Xuanlin Li, Xueqing Yu, Yang Xie, Zhenzhen Feng, Yanfang Ma, Yaolong Chen, Jiansheng Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
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.

Xuanlin LiCo-construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan & Education Ministry of P.R. China, Zhengzhou, China.
Xueqing YuCo-construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan & Education Ministry of P.R. China, Zhengzhou, China.
Yang XieCo-construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan & Education Ministry of P.R. China, Zhengzhou, China.
Zhenzhen FengCo-construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan & Education Ministry of P.R. China, Zhengzhou, China.
Yanfang MaEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Yaolong ChenEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Jiansheng LiCo-construction Collaborative Innovation Center for Chinese Medicine and Respiratory Diseases by Henan & Education Ministry of P.R. China, Zhengzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Instrument II (AGREE II)clinical practice guidelines (CPG)Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF)qualityReporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare checklist (RIGHT checklist)

Identifiers

PMID33313150
PMCPMC7723592

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.