Cargando…

A new scale for the evaluation of clinical practice guidelines applicability: development and appraisal

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to develop the clinical practice guidelines applicability evaluation (CPGAE-V1.0) scale and to evaluate its validity and reliability. METHODS: One hundred fifty assessors were invited to rate two rounds of importance scoring of the applicability indicators by using the 5...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Hui, Xie, Runsheng, Wang, Yangyang, Xie, Xiuli, Deng, Jingwen, Lu, Chuanjian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5918771/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29695274
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0746-5
_version_ 1783317486924464128
author Li, Hui
Xie, Runsheng
Wang, Yangyang
Xie, Xiuli
Deng, Jingwen
Lu, Chuanjian
author_facet Li, Hui
Xie, Runsheng
Wang, Yangyang
Xie, Xiuli
Deng, Jingwen
Lu, Chuanjian
author_sort Li, Hui
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This study aimed to develop the clinical practice guidelines applicability evaluation (CPGAE-V1.0) scale and to evaluate its validity and reliability. METHODS: One hundred fifty assessors were invited to rate two rounds of importance scoring of the applicability indicators by using the 5-point Likert scale. Approved indicators formed the CPGAE-V1.0 scale, consisting of 19 items, arranged into 4 domains. We enrolled eligible clinicians from 8 institutions to evaluate 9 clinical practice guidelines using the CPGAE-V1.0 scale. Content validity, construct validity, internal reliability, intra-rater reliability, and responsiveness were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 220 clinicians participated, and the response rate was 98.6% (217/220). The CPGAE-V1.0 scale had favorable content validity. The four-factor model produced acceptable fit indices. The scale had an excellent internal consistency and item discrimination. It could identify the degree of applicability of the different dimensions between different guidelines. In all domains, 77.8% (7/9) of CPGs in the minimum-scoring domain were concentrated in the “coordination of support” domain. CONCLUSIONS: The CPGAE-V1.0 scale is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the applicability of CPG. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-018-0746-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5918771
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59187712018-04-30 A new scale for the evaluation of clinical practice guidelines applicability: development and appraisal Li, Hui Xie, Runsheng Wang, Yangyang Xie, Xiuli Deng, Jingwen Lu, Chuanjian Implement Sci Research BACKGROUND: This study aimed to develop the clinical practice guidelines applicability evaluation (CPGAE-V1.0) scale and to evaluate its validity and reliability. METHODS: One hundred fifty assessors were invited to rate two rounds of importance scoring of the applicability indicators by using the 5-point Likert scale. Approved indicators formed the CPGAE-V1.0 scale, consisting of 19 items, arranged into 4 domains. We enrolled eligible clinicians from 8 institutions to evaluate 9 clinical practice guidelines using the CPGAE-V1.0 scale. Content validity, construct validity, internal reliability, intra-rater reliability, and responsiveness were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 220 clinicians participated, and the response rate was 98.6% (217/220). The CPGAE-V1.0 scale had favorable content validity. The four-factor model produced acceptable fit indices. The scale had an excellent internal consistency and item discrimination. It could identify the degree of applicability of the different dimensions between different guidelines. In all domains, 77.8% (7/9) of CPGs in the minimum-scoring domain were concentrated in the “coordination of support” domain. CONCLUSIONS: The CPGAE-V1.0 scale is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the applicability of CPG. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-018-0746-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-04-25 /pmc/articles/PMC5918771/ /pubmed/29695274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0746-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 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
Li, Hui
Xie, Runsheng
Wang, Yangyang
Xie, Xiuli
Deng, Jingwen
Lu, Chuanjian
A new scale for the evaluation of clinical practice guidelines applicability: development and appraisal
title A new scale for the evaluation of clinical practice guidelines applicability: development and appraisal
title_full A new scale for the evaluation of clinical practice guidelines applicability: development and appraisal
title_fullStr A new scale for the evaluation of clinical practice guidelines applicability: development and appraisal
title_full_unstemmed A new scale for the evaluation of clinical practice guidelines applicability: development and appraisal
title_short A new scale for the evaluation of clinical practice guidelines applicability: development and appraisal
title_sort new scale for the evaluation of clinical practice guidelines applicability: development and appraisal
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5918771/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29695274
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0746-5
work_keys_str_mv AT lihui anewscalefortheevaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesapplicabilitydevelopmentandappraisal
AT xierunsheng anewscalefortheevaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesapplicabilitydevelopmentandappraisal
AT wangyangyang anewscalefortheevaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesapplicabilitydevelopmentandappraisal
AT xiexiuli anewscalefortheevaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesapplicabilitydevelopmentandappraisal
AT dengjingwen anewscalefortheevaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesapplicabilitydevelopmentandappraisal
AT luchuanjian anewscalefortheevaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesapplicabilitydevelopmentandappraisal
AT lihui newscalefortheevaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesapplicabilitydevelopmentandappraisal
AT xierunsheng newscalefortheevaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesapplicabilitydevelopmentandappraisal
AT wangyangyang newscalefortheevaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesapplicabilitydevelopmentandappraisal
AT xiexiuli newscalefortheevaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesapplicabilitydevelopmentandappraisal
AT dengjingwen newscalefortheevaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesapplicabilitydevelopmentandappraisal
AT luchuanjian newscalefortheevaluationofclinicalpracticeguidelinesapplicabilitydevelopmentandappraisal