• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

结直肠癌筛查指南主要基于低质量到中等质量证据。

Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines Are Primarily Based on Low-Moderate-Quality Evidence.

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Hackensack Meridian Health, Palisades Medical Center, North Bergen, NJ, USA.

Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Dig Dis Sci. 2021 Dec;66(12):4208-4219. doi: 10.1007/s10620-020-06755-9. Epub 2021 Jan 12.

DOI:10.1007/s10620-020-06755-9
PMID:33433802
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Owning to colorectal cancer's (CRC) high mortality, multiple societies developed screening guidelines.

AIMS

We aimed to assess the overall quality of CRC screening guidelines.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed to review CRC screening guidelines for conflicts of interest (COI), recommendation quality and strength, external document review, use of patient representative, and recommendation age-as per Institute of Medicine (IOM) standards. In addition, recommendations were compared between guidelines/societies. Statistical analysis was conducted using R.

RESULTS

Twelve manuscripts were included in final analysis. Not all guidelines reported on COI, provided a grading method, underwent external review, or included patient representation. 14.5%, 34.2%, and 51.3% of recommendations were based on high-, moderate-, and low-quality evidence, respectively. 27.8%, 54.6%, and 17.5% of recommendations were strong, weak/conditional, and did not provide a strength, respectively. The proportion of high-quality evidence and strong recommendations did not significantly differ across societies, nor were significant associations between publication year and evidence quality seen (P = 0.4).

CONCLUSIONS

While the majority of the CRC guidelines contain aspects of the standards set forth by the IOM, there is an overall lack of adherence. As over 85% of recommendations are based on low-moderate quality evidence, further studies on CRC screening are warranted to improve the overall quality of evidence.

摘要

背景

由于结直肠癌(CRC)的高死亡率,多个学会制定了筛查指南。

目的

我们旨在评估 CRC 筛查指南的总体质量。

方法

系统检索了 CRC 筛查指南中的利益冲突(COI)、推荐质量和强度、外部文件审查、使用患者代表以及推荐年龄(根据医学研究所(IOM)标准)的相关信息。此外,还比较了指南/学会之间的建议。使用 R 进行了统计分析。

结果

最终分析纳入了 12 篇文献。并非所有指南都报告了 COI、提供了分级方法、进行了外部审查或纳入了患者代表。分别有 14.5%、34.2%和 51.3%的建议基于高质量、中质量和低质量证据。分别有 27.8%、54.6%和 17.5%的建议为强、弱/有条件和未提供强度。不同学会之间的高质量证据和强建议的比例没有显著差异,也没有观察到发表年份与证据质量之间存在显著关联(P=0.4)。

结论

虽然大多数 CRC 指南都包含了 IOM 制定的标准的某些方面,但总体上仍存在不足。由于超过 85%的建议基于低质量到中等质量的证据,因此需要进一步研究 CRC 筛查,以提高证据的总体质量。

相似文献

1
Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines Are Primarily Based on Low-Moderate-Quality Evidence.结直肠癌筛查指南主要基于低质量到中等质量证据。
Dig Dis Sci. 2021 Dec;66(12):4208-4219. doi: 10.1007/s10620-020-06755-9. Epub 2021 Jan 12.
2
Colorectal Cancer Prevention in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Analysis of the Overall Quality of Guideline Recommendations.炎症性肠病中的结直肠癌预防:指南推荐整体质量的系统分析。
Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2022 May 4;28(5):745-754. doi: 10.1093/ibd/izab164.
3
The overall quality of evidence of recommendations surrounding nutrition and diet in inflammatory bowel disease.炎症性肠病中营养和饮食相关建议的总体证据质量。
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2023 Apr 15;38(1):98. doi: 10.1007/s00384-023-04404-x.
4
Extra-Colonic Malignancy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: a Paucity of Recommendations with Weak Evidence.炎症性肠病中的结外恶性肿瘤:缺乏推荐意见且证据薄弱。
J Gastrointest Cancer. 2022 Sep;53(3):669-673. doi: 10.1007/s12029-021-00700-3. Epub 2021 Aug 31.
5
Clinical Practice Guideline on Screening for Colorectal Cancer in Individuals With a Family History of Nonhereditary Colorectal Cancer or Adenoma: The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Banff Consensus.家族性非遗传性结直肠癌或腺瘤病史个体的结直肠癌筛查临床实践指南:加拿大胃肠病学协会班夫共识。
Gastroenterology. 2018 Nov;155(5):1325-1347.e3. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.08.017. Epub 2018 Aug 16.
6
Health Maintenance and Preventative Care in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review of the Overall Quality of Societal Recommendations.炎症性肠病的健康维护与预防性护理:社会推荐总体质量的系统评价
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2023 Apr 1;57(4):325-334. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001833.
7
When Should Guidelines Change? A Clarion Call for Evidence Regarding the Benefits and Risks of Screening for Colorectal Cancer at Earlier Ages.指南何时应做出改变?关于在更早年龄筛查结直肠癌的益处和风险的证据的强烈呼吁。
Gastroenterology. 2018 Oct;155(4):947-949. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.08.040. Epub 2018 Sep 4.
8
Recommendations from the international evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome.国际循证指南关于多囊卵巢综合征评估和管理的推荐意见。
Fertil Steril. 2018 Aug;110(3):364-379. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.05.004. Epub 2018 Jul 19.
9
Poor Knowledge of Colorectal Cancer Screening and Surveillance Guidelines in a National Cohort of Digestive Disease Specialists.普通消化病专家对结直肠癌筛查和监测指南知之甚少的全国性队列研究
Dig Dis Sci. 2019 Feb;64(2):391-400. doi: 10.1007/s10620-018-5339-2. Epub 2018 Oct 28.
10
European guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis. First Edition--Principles of evidence assessment and methods for reaching recommendations.欧洲结直肠癌筛查和诊断质量保证指南。第一版——证据评估原则和提出建议的方法。
Endoscopy. 2012 Sep;44 Suppl 3:SE9-14. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1309781. Epub 2012 Sep 25.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparative Efficacy Randomized Controlled Trials in Rheumatology Guidelines.风湿病学指南中的比较疗效随机对照试验
ACR Open Rheumatol. 2022 Oct;4(10):897-902. doi: 10.1002/acr2.11484. Epub 2022 Jul 26.

本文引用的文献

1
Screening for Colorectal Cancer in Asymptomatic Average-Risk Adults: A Guidance Statement From the American College of Physicians.美国医师学院关于无症状一般风险成人结直肠癌筛查的指南声明。
Ann Intern Med. 2019 Nov 5;171(9):643-654. doi: 10.7326/M19-0642.
2
Colorectal cancer screening with faecal immunochemical testing, sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy: a clinical practice guideline.粪便免疫化学检测、乙状结肠镜检查或结肠镜检查筛查结直肠癌:临床实践指南。
BMJ. 2019 Oct 2;367:l5515. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l5515.
3
A review of recent publication trends from top publishing countries.
对顶级出版国家近期出版趋势的回顾。
Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 27;7(1):147. doi: 10.1186/s13643-018-0819-1.
4
Management of financial conflicts of interests in clinical practice guidelines in Germany: results from the public database GuidelineWatch.德国临床实践指南中财务利益冲突的管理:来自公共数据库GuidelineWatch的结果。
BMC Med Ethics. 2018 Jun 28;19(1):65. doi: 10.1186/s12910-018-0309-y.
5
Colorectal cancer screening for average-risk adults: 2018 guideline update from the American Cancer Society.美国癌症协会 2018 年普通风险成年人结直肠癌筛查指南更新
CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Jul;68(4):250-281. doi: 10.3322/caac.21457. Epub 2018 May 30.
6
The Evidence Basis for the American College of Rheumatology Practice Guidelines.美国风湿病学会实践指南的证据基础。
JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Jan 1;178(1):146-148. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.6680.
7
AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both.AMSTAR 2:一种用于系统评价的关键评估工具,该系统评价包括医疗保健干预措施的随机或非随机研究,或两者皆有。
BMJ. 2017 Sep 21;358:j4008. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j4008.
8
Colorectal Cancer Screening: Recommendations for Physicians and Patients from the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer.结直肠癌筛查:美国多学会专家组对医生和患者的建议。
Am J Gastroenterol. 2017 Jul;112(7):1016-1030. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2017.174. Epub 2017 Jun 6.
9
Systematic Analysis and Critical Appraisal of the Quality of the Scientific Evidence and Conflicts of Interest in Practice Guidelines (2005-2013) for Barrett's Esophagus.巴雷特食管实践指南(2005 - 2013年)中科学证据质量及利益冲突的系统分析与批判性评估
Dig Dis Sci. 2016 Oct;61(10):2812-2822. doi: 10.1007/s10620-016-4222-2. Epub 2016 Jun 15.
10
Screening for Colorectal Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.结直肠癌筛查:美国预防服务工作组推荐声明。
JAMA. 2016 Jun 21;315(23):2564-2575. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.5989.