Li J, Yao P T, Niu J Q, Sun X, Ren J S, Chen H D, Li X, Wei L P, Lyu Z Y, Feng X S, Chen W Q, Li N, Dai M
National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medial Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
School of Health Management and Education, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100069, China.
Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2019 Apr 6;53(4):398-404. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-9624.2019.04.013.
To systematically review the quality and reporting quality of colorectal cancer screening guidelines, and to provide reference for the update of colorectal cancer screening guidelines and colorectal cancer screening in China. "Colorectal cancer", "colorectal tumor", "screening", "screening", "guide", "consensus", "Colorectal cancer", "Colorectal neoplasms", "Screening", "Early Detection of Cancer", "Guideline" and "recommendation" were used as search keywords. The literature retrieval for all the Chinese and English guidelines published before April 2018 was conducted by using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc), Cochrane Library, Guideline International Network, China Guidelines Clearinghouse (CGC) and the official website of the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), the American Cancer Society (ACS), International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), Australia Cancer Council (ACC) and Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain & Ireland (ACPGBI). The inclusion criteria were independent guidance documents for colorectal cancer screening. The language is limited to Chinese and English. The exclusion criteria were literature on interpretation, evaluation, introduction, etc., as well as the translated version of the guide and old guides. The quality and reporting norms of colorectal cancer screening guidelines were compared and evaluated using the European Guideline Research and Assessment Tool (AGREE Ⅱ) and the Practice Guideline Reporting Standard (RIGHT). A total of 15 guides were included. The results of the AGREE Ⅱ quality evaluation showed that the overall quality of 15 guides was high. Among them, there were 9 guides with an overall score of 50 or more, 10 with a recommendation level of "A", and 2 with a rating of "B". There were 3 guides for "C"; each guide scores higher in scope and purpose, and clarity, and scores vary greatly in the areas of participants, rigor, applicability, and independence. The results of the RIGHT evaluation showed that 15 guides were insufficient in six areas except for background information, evidence, recommendations, reviews and quality assurance, funding and conflict of interest statements and management, and other aspects. The overall quality of included guidelines for colorectal cancer screening is high, but the normative nature needs to be strengthened.
系统评价结直肠癌筛查指南的质量和报告质量，为我国结直肠癌筛查指南的更新及结直肠癌筛查工作提供参考。以“结直肠癌”“结直肠肿瘤”“筛查”“筛检”“指南”“共识”“Colorectal cancer”“Colorectal neoplasms”“Screening”“Early Detection of Cancer”“Guideline”及“recommendation”为检索词，通过PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、中国知网（CNKI）、万方数据、中国生物医学文献数据库（CBMdisc）、Cochrane图书馆、指南国际网络、中国指南网（CGC）以及美国预防服务工作组（USPSTF）、美国癌症协会（ACS）、国际癌症研究机构（IARC）、澳大利亚癌症理事会（ACC）、英国及爱尔兰结直肠外科学会（ACPGBI）官方网站，检索2018年4月以前发表的所有中英文指南。纳入标准为结直肠癌筛查的独立指导文件，语言限定为中文和英文。排除标准为关于解读、评价、介绍等方面的文献，以及指南的翻译版本和旧版指南。采用欧洲指南研究与评价工具（AGREEⅡ）和实践指南报告标准（RIGHT）对结直肠癌筛查指南的质量和报告规范进行比较评价。共纳入15部指南。AGREEⅡ质量评价结果显示,15部指南整体质量较高，其中总分≥50分的有9部，推荐等级为“A”的有10部，“B”级的有2部，“C”级的有3部；各指南在范围与目的、清晰性方面得分较高，在参与人员、严谨性、适用性、独立性等方面得分差异较大。RIGHT评价结果显示，15部指南在背景信息、证据、推荐意见、评审与质量保证、资金资助及利益冲突声明与管理等6个方面存在不足。纳入的结直肠癌筛查指南整体质量较高，但规范性仍需加强。
