Article type
Abstract
"Background: The number of guidelines and consensus are increasing in recent years, and it is necessary to evaluate them to further promote quality improvement.
Objectives: To analyze the quality of Chinese guidelines and consensus published in medical journals in 2021 and 2022.
Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI and other Chinese database using the search terms ""guideline*"", ""recommendation*"", ""consensus"", etc. The search period was from 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2022, and two persons independently screened the retrieved literature. We included guidelines or consensus that was developed by a Chinese institution or led by a Chinese scholar, contained terms related to guidelines or consensus such as ""guideline"" in the title, focused on clinical or public health issues, and published in peer-reviewed journals. Two persons independently evaluated the guidelines or consensus using ""the Scientific, Transparent and Applicable Rankings tool for clinical practice guidelines"" tool (39 items with a score of 100 points), and disagreements were resolved by discussion.
Results: 1149 Chinese guidelines and consensus were finally included in 2021, of which the average score for guidelines was 31.9, with a median of 25.9; the average score for consensus was 22.7, with a median of 19.6. 1477 Chinese guidelines and consensus were finally included in 2022, of which the average score for guidelines was 43.4, with a median of 39.0; the average score for consensus was 28.3, with a median score of 25.1. In 2021, the areas with the highest and lowest scores for both guidelines and consensus were the same, the recommendation area and the protocol area, respectively. The areas with the highest and lowest scores for both guidelines and consensus in 2022 were exactly the same as they were in 2021. Other detailed results will be presented at the meeting.
Conclusions: The guidelines and consensus scores were lower in both 2021 and 2022, but the guidelines and consensus scores in 2022 improved by 36.1% and 24.7%, respectively, compared to 2021. It is recommended that guidelines and consensus be developed in accordance with relevant methodological standards.
Statement: Public or consumers were not involved in this study."
Objectives: To analyze the quality of Chinese guidelines and consensus published in medical journals in 2021 and 2022.
Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI and other Chinese database using the search terms ""guideline*"", ""recommendation*"", ""consensus"", etc. The search period was from 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2022, and two persons independently screened the retrieved literature. We included guidelines or consensus that was developed by a Chinese institution or led by a Chinese scholar, contained terms related to guidelines or consensus such as ""guideline"" in the title, focused on clinical or public health issues, and published in peer-reviewed journals. Two persons independently evaluated the guidelines or consensus using ""the Scientific, Transparent and Applicable Rankings tool for clinical practice guidelines"" tool (39 items with a score of 100 points), and disagreements were resolved by discussion.
Results: 1149 Chinese guidelines and consensus were finally included in 2021, of which the average score for guidelines was 31.9, with a median of 25.9; the average score for consensus was 22.7, with a median of 19.6. 1477 Chinese guidelines and consensus were finally included in 2022, of which the average score for guidelines was 43.4, with a median of 39.0; the average score for consensus was 28.3, with a median score of 25.1. In 2021, the areas with the highest and lowest scores for both guidelines and consensus were the same, the recommendation area and the protocol area, respectively. The areas with the highest and lowest scores for both guidelines and consensus in 2022 were exactly the same as they were in 2021. Other detailed results will be presented at the meeting.
Conclusions: The guidelines and consensus scores were lower in both 2021 and 2022, but the guidelines and consensus scores in 2022 improved by 36.1% and 24.7%, respectively, compared to 2021. It is recommended that guidelines and consensus be developed in accordance with relevant methodological standards.
Statement: Public or consumers were not involved in this study."