Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: In response to a public health emergency, such as the novel coronavirus (2019-nCov) outbreak, the rapid guidelines should be developed in a shorter time frame. However, a challenge with developing rapid guidelines is maintaining reporting and methodological rigor with in condensed timeframe.
Objectives: To evaluate the reporting and methodological quality of Chinese rapid guidelines with RIGHT checklist and AGREE Ⅱ.
Methods: We systematically searched Medline (via Pubmed), Chinse electronic databases including Wanfang Data, China National Knowledge Internet and Chinese Biology Medicine Library from the inception to February, 2020. The National Health Commission of PRC, the Chinese Medical Journal Network and Baidu also were searched to identify additional potential guidelines. The RIGHT instrument was used by two independent reviewers to systematic appraisal with 22 items for included Chinese rapid guidelines. Each item was rated as ‘‘Yes’’ for total compliance, ‘‘Unclear’’ for partial compliance or ‘‘No’’ for non-compliance, respectively. The number and proportion of reported items for each item were also calculated. Statistical analyses were produced using SPSS version 16.0 for Windows. Methodological quality of the included Chinese rapid guidelines was appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. Agreement among reviewers was assessed by intra-class correlation coefficient.
Results and conclusions: This study is ongoing and results will be presented at the Cochrane Colloquium as available.
Objectives: To evaluate the reporting and methodological quality of Chinese rapid guidelines with RIGHT checklist and AGREE Ⅱ.
Methods: We systematically searched Medline (via Pubmed), Chinse electronic databases including Wanfang Data, China National Knowledge Internet and Chinese Biology Medicine Library from the inception to February, 2020. The National Health Commission of PRC, the Chinese Medical Journal Network and Baidu also were searched to identify additional potential guidelines. The RIGHT instrument was used by two independent reviewers to systematic appraisal with 22 items for included Chinese rapid guidelines. Each item was rated as ‘‘Yes’’ for total compliance, ‘‘Unclear’’ for partial compliance or ‘‘No’’ for non-compliance, respectively. The number and proportion of reported items for each item were also calculated. Statistical analyses were produced using SPSS version 16.0 for Windows. Methodological quality of the included Chinese rapid guidelines was appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. Agreement among reviewers was assessed by intra-class correlation coefficient.
Results and conclusions: This study is ongoing and results will be presented at the Cochrane Colloquium as available.