Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Francie van Zijl Drive, Parow Valley, 7505 Cape Town, South Africa; European and Developing Countries Clinical Trial Partnership (EDCTP)-Africa Office, Francie van Zijl Drive, Parow Valley, 7505 Cape Town, South Africa.
Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Francie van Zijl Drive, Parow Valley, 7505 Cape Town, South Africa.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Mar;83:31-36. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.09.015. Epub 2016 Nov 5.
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.
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.
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%.
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.
临床实践指南(CPG)的制定在过去十年中不断发展,现在更加注重透明度、制定的严谨性和报告标准。我们的评估评估了选定的南非初级保健(PC)CPG 的指南制定过程和报告的质量。
两位作者迭代地确定了 CPG,旨在寻找反映南非 PC 环境中患者常见病症的 CPG。CPG 可以解决诊断、治疗或临床管理问题。每个 CPG 都由两位评审员使用 AGREE II(指南研究和评估评估)质量检查表和加权评分算法进行独立评估,以计算六个领域的分数。
我们纳入了来自国家卫生部和临床专业协会的 16 项 CPG。总体而言,发展严谨性、编辑独立性和适用性这三个领域的中位数得分最低(分别为 0、4%和 13%)。报告的清晰度得分最高(69%),其中 7 项 CPG 得分高于 70%。
选定的南非 PC CPG 的方法学质量总体上较差至中等。应共同努力,确保 CPG 制定者进行透明、严谨和最新的证据评估,并进行良好报告。