Shi X H, Wang S X, Wang Z, Wang J, Zhang Z H, Liu Y P, Zhang H Y, Gao H W, Zhou X Y, Rao Q, Liang L, Yao X H, Liu D G, Liang Z Y
Department of Pathology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100730, China.
Editorial Office of Chinese Journal of Pathology, Chinese Medical Assocoation Publishing House, Beijing 100052, China.
Zhonghua Bing Li Xue Za Zhi. 2024 Jun 8;53(6):528-534. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112151-20231105-00333.
The STAR tool was used to evaluate and analyze the science, transparency, and applicability of Chinese pathology guidelines and consensus published in medical journals in 2022. There were a total of 18 pathology guidelines and consensuses published in 2022, including 1 guideline and 17 consensuses. The results showed that the guideline score was 21.83 points, lower than the overall guideline average (43.4 points). Consensus ratings scored an average of 27.87 points, on par with the overall consensus level (28.3 points). Areas that scored above the overall level were "conflict of interest" and "working groups", while areas that scored below the overall level were "proposals", "funding", "evidence", "consensus approaches" and "accessibility". To sum up, the formulation of pathology guidelines and consensuses in 2022 is not standardized, and the evidence retrieval process, evidence evaluation methods and grading criteria for recommendations on clinical issues are not provided in the formulation process; the process and method for reaching consensus are not provided, the plan is lacking, and registration is not carried out. It is therefore suggested that guidelines/consensus makers in the field of pathology should attach importance to evidence-based medical evidence, strictly follow guideline formulation methods and processes, further improve the scientific, applicable and transparent guidelines/consensuses in the field, and better provide support for clinicians and patients.
STAR工具用于评估和分析2022年发表在医学期刊上的中国病理学指南和共识的科学性、透明度和适用性。2022年共发表了18项病理学指南和共识，其中包括1项指南和17项共识。结果显示，该指南得分为21.83分，低于指南总体平均分（43.4分）。共识评级平均得分为27.87分，与共识总体水平（28.3分）相当。得分高于总体水平的领域是“利益冲突”和“工作组”，而得分低于总体水平的领域是“建议”“资金”“证据”“共识方法”和“可及性”。综上所述，2022年病理学指南和共识的制定不规范，制定过程中未提供临床问题推荐意见的证据检索过程、证据评估方法及分级标准；未提供达成共识的过程和方法，缺乏规划且未进行注册。因此建议病理学领域的指南/共识制定者应重视循证医学证据，严格遵循指南制定方法和流程，进一步完善该领域科学、适用且透明的指南/共识，更好地为临床医生和患者提供支持。
