Cargando…

Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II

OBJECTIVE: The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) is a representative, quantitative evaluation tool for evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Recently, AGREE was revised (AGREE II). The continuity of evaluation data obtained from the original version (AGREE I)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Seto, Kanako, Matsumoto, Kunichika, Kitazawa, Takefumi, Fujita, Shigeru, Hanaoka, Shimpei, Hasegawa, Tomonori
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5721454/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29216903
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-3041-7
_version_ 1783284809583296512
author Seto, Kanako
Matsumoto, Kunichika
Kitazawa, Takefumi
Fujita, Shigeru
Hanaoka, Shimpei
Hasegawa, Tomonori
author_facet Seto, Kanako
Matsumoto, Kunichika
Kitazawa, Takefumi
Fujita, Shigeru
Hanaoka, Shimpei
Hasegawa, Tomonori
author_sort Seto, Kanako
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) is a representative, quantitative evaluation tool for evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Recently, AGREE was revised (AGREE II). The continuity of evaluation data obtained from the original version (AGREE I) has not yet been demonstrated. The present study investigated the relationship between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II to evaluate the continuity between the two measurement tools. RESULTS: An evaluation team consisting of three trained librarians evaluated 68 CPGs issued in 2011–2012 in Japan using AGREE I and AGREE II. The correlation coefficients for the six domains were: (1) scope and purpose 0.758; (2) stakeholder involvement 0.708; (3) rigor of development 0.982; (4) clarity of presentation 0.702; (5) applicability 0.919; and (6) editorial independence 0.971. The item “Overall Guideline Assessment” was newly introduced in AGREE II. This global item had a correlation coefficient of 0.628 using the six AGREE I domains, and 0.685 using the 23 items. Our results suggest that data obtained from AGREE I can be transferred to AGREE II, and the “Overall Guideline Assessment” data can be determined with high reliability using a standardized score of the 23 items. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13104-017-3041-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5721454
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57214542017-12-11 Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II Seto, Kanako Matsumoto, Kunichika Kitazawa, Takefumi Fujita, Shigeru Hanaoka, Shimpei Hasegawa, Tomonori BMC Res Notes Research Note OBJECTIVE: The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) is a representative, quantitative evaluation tool for evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Recently, AGREE was revised (AGREE II). The continuity of evaluation data obtained from the original version (AGREE I) has not yet been demonstrated. The present study investigated the relationship between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II to evaluate the continuity between the two measurement tools. RESULTS: An evaluation team consisting of three trained librarians evaluated 68 CPGs issued in 2011–2012 in Japan using AGREE I and AGREE II. The correlation coefficients for the six domains were: (1) scope and purpose 0.758; (2) stakeholder involvement 0.708; (3) rigor of development 0.982; (4) clarity of presentation 0.702; (5) applicability 0.919; and (6) editorial independence 0.971. The item “Overall Guideline Assessment” was newly introduced in AGREE II. This global item had a correlation coefficient of 0.628 using the six AGREE I domains, and 0.685 using the 23 items. Our results suggest that data obtained from AGREE I can be transferred to AGREE II, and the “Overall Guideline Assessment” data can be determined with high reliability using a standardized score of the 23 items. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13104-017-3041-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-12-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5721454/ /pubmed/29216903 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-3041-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Note
Seto, Kanako
Matsumoto, Kunichika
Kitazawa, Takefumi
Fujita, Shigeru
Hanaoka, Shimpei
Hasegawa, Tomonori
Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II
title Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II
title_full Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II
title_fullStr Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II
title_short Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II
title_sort evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the agree instrument: comparison between data obtained from agree i and agree ii
topic Research Note
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5721454/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29216903
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-3041-7
work_keys_str_mv AT setokanako evaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesusingtheagreeinstrumentcomparisonbetweendataobtainedfromagreeiandagreeii
AT matsumotokunichika evaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesusingtheagreeinstrumentcomparisonbetweendataobtainedfromagreeiandagreeii
AT kitazawatakefumi evaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesusingtheagreeinstrumentcomparisonbetweendataobtainedfromagreeiandagreeii
AT fujitashigeru evaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesusingtheagreeinstrumentcomparisonbetweendataobtainedfromagreeiandagreeii
AT hanaokashimpei evaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesusingtheagreeinstrumentcomparisonbetweendataobtainedfromagreeiandagreeii
AT hasegawatomonori evaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesusingtheagreeinstrumentcomparisonbetweendataobtainedfromagreeiandagreeii