Department of Internal Medicine, Kyoto Min-Iren Asukai Hospital, Tanaka Asukai-cho 89, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8226, Japan; Department of Community Medicine in the Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Yoshida Konoe-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan; Systematic Review Workshop Peer Support Group (SRWS-PSG), Japan; Department of Healthcare Epidemiology, Graduate School of Medicine / Public Health, Kyoto University, Yoshida Konoe-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan.
Systematic Review Workshop Peer Support Group (SRWS-PSG), Japan; Department of Healthcare Epidemiology, Graduate School of Medicine / Public Health, Kyoto University, Yoshida Konoe-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 Oct;138:22-31. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.06.025. Epub 2021 Jul 2.
We aimed to evaluate the characteristics, quality, and related factors of the Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) published in recent years.
In this cross-sectional, meta-epidemiological study, we conducted a Google search for CPGs published by 30 Japanese medical societies that are the basis for training specialties between 2018 and 2019. We used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool and the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) statement to evaluate the quality.
We included 53 systematic review-based CPGs. The median score was 0.54 (IQR, 0.38-0.62) for Stakeholder involvement, 0.57 (IQR, 0.51-0.66) in Rigor of development, 0.33 (IQR 0.21-0.46) in Applicability, and 0.63 (IQR 0.46-0.73) in Editorial independence. The number of guideline developers/clinical question ratio (odds ratio [OR]: 4.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.97, 8.70) and the adopted guideline development methods (OR: 3.69, 95% CI: 1.14, 12.0) were significantly related to the Rigor of development.
The quality of Japanese CPGs published in recent years remains low. Our study suggests that increasing contributors and adopting the latest guideline development methods at the beginning of the project may improve the quality of the Japanese CPGs.
评估近年来发表的日本临床实践指南(CPGs)的特点、质量及其相关因素。
在这项横断面、荟萃流行病学研究中,我们对 2018 年至 2019 年期间 30 个日本医学协会发布的、作为专科培训基础的 CPGs 进行了谷歌搜索。我们使用评估指南研究与评价 II (AGREE II)工具和卫生保健实践指南报告条目(RIGHT)声明来评估质量。
我们纳入了 53 项基于系统评价的 CPG。利益相关者参与的中位数评分为 0.54(IQR,0.38-0.62),制定的严谨性评分为 0.57(IQR,0.51-0.66),适用性评分为 0.33(IQR 0.21-0.46),编辑独立性评分为 0.63(IQR 0.46-0.73)。指南制定者/临床问题的数量比(比值比[OR]:4.14,95%置信区间[CI]:1.97,8.70)和采用的指南制定方法(OR:3.69,95%CI:1.14,12.0)与制定的严谨性呈显著相关。
近年来发表的日本 CPGs 的质量仍然较低。我们的研究表明,增加参与者并在项目开始时采用最新的指南制定方法可能会提高日本 CPGs 的质量。