Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
J Korean Med Sci. 2013 Mar;28(3):357-65. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2013.28.3.357. Epub 2013 Mar 4.
The objective of this study was to conduct the systematic evaluation of methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in Korea. The authors conducted a very comprehensive literature search to identify potential CPGs for evaluation. CPGs were selected which were consistent with a predetermined criteria. Four reviewers evaluated the quality of the CPGs using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE) Instrument. AGREE item scores and standardized domain scores were calculated. The inter-rater reliability of each domain was evaluated using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Consequently, 66 CPGs were selected and their quality evaluated. ICCs for CPG appraisal using the AGREE Instrument ranged from 0.626 to 0.877. Except for the "Scope and Purpose" and "Clarity and Presentation domains", 80% of CPGs scored less than 40 in all other domains. This review shows that many Korean research groups and academic societies have made considerable efforts to develop CPGs, and the number of CPGs has increased over time. However, the quality of CPGs in Korea were not good according to the AGREE Instrument evaluation. Therefore, we should make more of an effort to ensure the high quality of CPGs.
本研究旨在对韩国临床实践指南（CPG）的方法学质量进行系统评价。作者进行了非常全面的文献检索，以确定潜在的 CPG 进行评估。选择了符合预定标准的 CPG。四位评审员使用评估、研究和评价指南（AGREE）工具评估 CPG 的质量。计算了 AGREE 项目得分和标准化领域得分。使用组内相关系数（ICC）评估每个领域的评分者间可靠性。因此，选择了 66 个 CPG 并对其进行了质量评估。使用 AGREE 工具进行 CPG 评估的 ICC 范围为 0.626 至 0.877。除了“范围和目的”和“清晰度和表述”领域外，所有其他领域中，80%的 CPG 得分均低于 40。本综述表明，许多韩国研究团队和学术协会为制定 CPG 做出了相当大的努力，并且 CPG 的数量随着时间的推移而增加。然而，根据 AGREE 工具评估，韩国 CPG 的质量并不理想。因此，我们应该更加努力确保 CPG 的高质量。
