Yao Sha, Wei Dang, Chen Yao-Long, Wang Qi, Wang Xiao-Qin, Zeng Zhao, Li Hui
School of Basic Medical Sciences, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510405, China.
School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, 730000, China.
Chin J Integr Med. 2017 May;23(5):381-385. doi: 10.1007/s11655-016-2739-z. Epub 2016 Dec 1.
To assess the quality of integrative medicine clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) published before 2014.
A systematic search of the scientific literature published before 2014 was conducted to select integrative medicine CPGs. Four major Chinese integrated databases and one guideline database were searched: the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), Wanfang Data, and the China Guideline Clearinghouse (CGC). Four reviewers independently assessed the quality of the included guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II Instrument. Overall consensus among the reviewers was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC).
A total of 41 guidelines published from 2003 to 2014 were included. The overall consensus among the reviewers was good [ICC: 0.928; 95% confifi dence interval (CI): 0.920 to 0.935]. The scores on the 6 AGREE domains were: 17% for scope and purpose (range: 6% to 32%), 11% for stakeholder involvement (range: 0 to 24%), 10% for rigor of development (range: 3% to 22%), 39% for clarity and presentation (range: 25% to 64%), 11% for applicability (range: 4% to 24%), and 1% for editorial independence (range: 0 to 15%).
The quality of integrative medicine CPGs was low, the development of integrative medicine CPGs should be guided by systematic methodology. More emphasis should be placed on multi-disciplinary guideline development groups, quality of evidence, management of funding and conflfl icts of interest, and guideline updates in the process of developing integrative medicine CPGs in China.
评估2014年前发布的中西医结合临床实践指南(CPG)的质量。
对2014年前发表的科学文献进行系统检索,以筛选中西医结合CPG。检索了四个主要的中文综合数据库和一个指南数据库:中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、中国知网(CNKI)、维普中文科技期刊数据库(VIP)、万方数据和中国指南数据库(CGC)。四名评审员使用《研究与评价指南评估》(AGREE)II工具独立评估纳入指南的质量。使用组内相关系数(ICC)评估评审员之间的总体一致性。
共纳入2003年至2014年发布的41项指南。评审员之间的总体一致性良好[ICC:0.928;95%置信区间(CI):0.920至0.935]。AGREE六个领域的得分分别为:范围和目的17%(范围:6%至第32%),利益相关者参与11%(范围:0至24%),制定的严谨性10%(范围:3%至22%),清晰度和呈现39%(范围:25%至64%),适用性11%(范围:4%至24%),编辑独立性1%(范围:0至15%)。
中西医结合CPG的质量较低,中西医结合CPG的制定应以系统方法为指导。在中国制定中西医结合CPG的过程中,应更加重视多学科指南制定小组、证据质量、资金管理和利益冲突以及指南更新。