Cargando…

Methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines for genetic testing in children: A systematic assessment using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II instrument

Genetic testing of children is faced with numerous problems. High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are needed to ensure its safe, and appropriate use. This study aimed to systematically identify the current CPGs for genetic testing in children, and to assess the methodological quality of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jiao, Xue-Feng, Li, Hai-Long, Cheng, Liang, Zhang, Chuan, Yang, Chun-Song, Han, Jonathan, Yi, Qiu-Sha, Chen, Zhe, Zeng, Li-Nan, Zhang, Ling-Li
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6946213/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31876744
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000018521
_version_ 1783485312736952320
author Jiao, Xue-Feng
Li, Hai-Long
Cheng, Liang
Zhang, Chuan
Yang, Chun-Song
Han, Jonathan
Yi, Qiu-Sha
Chen, Zhe
Zeng, Li-Nan
Zhang, Ling-Li
author_facet Jiao, Xue-Feng
Li, Hai-Long
Cheng, Liang
Zhang, Chuan
Yang, Chun-Song
Han, Jonathan
Yi, Qiu-Sha
Chen, Zhe
Zeng, Li-Nan
Zhang, Ling-Li
author_sort Jiao, Xue-Feng
collection PubMed
description Genetic testing of children is faced with numerous problems. High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are needed to ensure its safe, and appropriate use. This study aimed to systematically identify the current CPGs for genetic testing in children, and to assess the methodological quality of these CPGs. We searched 6 databases, 3 guideline clearinghouses, and 9 web sites of relevant academic agencies from inception to February 2019. CPGs focused on genetic testing in children were included. Four reviewers independently appraised the quality of the eligible CPGs using the appraisal of guidelines for research, and evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. Seventeen CPGs meeting our inclusion criteria were included. Among them, 16 CPGs were focused on the genetic diagnosis/evaluation of diseases, while only 1 CPG was focused on pharmacogenetics. The median domain scores from highest to lowest were: scope and purpose 80.56% (range: 56.95%–87.50%), clarity of presentation 72.22% (range: 45.83%–88.89%), stakeholder involvement 45.83% (range: 27.78%–55.56%), applicability 31.25% (range: 19.79%–54.17%), rigor of development 21.88%, (range: 13.02%–71.88%), and editorial independence 18.75% (range: 0%–83.33%). According to the overall quality, 6 (35%) CPGs were “not recommended,” 8 (47%) CPGs were “recommended with modifications,” and only 3 (18%) CPGs were “recommended.” The clinical topics of the “recommended” CPGs were warfarin, familial Mediterranean fever, and pediatric pulmonary arterial hypertension. The quality of CPGs for genetic testing in children was generally low, and variable across different CPGs and different AGREE II domains. In future guideline development, more attention should be paid to the aspects of stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, applicability, and editorial independence. Not only will guideline users benefit from our results when determining whether to adopt related CPGs to guide genetic testing in children, but guideline developers could also take into account our results to improve the quality of future CPGs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6946213
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69462132020-01-31 Methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines for genetic testing in children: A systematic assessment using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II instrument Jiao, Xue-Feng Li, Hai-Long Cheng, Liang Zhang, Chuan Yang, Chun-Song Han, Jonathan Yi, Qiu-Sha Chen, Zhe Zeng, Li-Nan Zhang, Ling-Li Medicine (Baltimore) 6200 Genetic testing of children is faced with numerous problems. High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are needed to ensure its safe, and appropriate use. This study aimed to systematically identify the current CPGs for genetic testing in children, and to assess the methodological quality of these CPGs. We searched 6 databases, 3 guideline clearinghouses, and 9 web sites of relevant academic agencies from inception to February 2019. CPGs focused on genetic testing in children were included. Four reviewers independently appraised the quality of the eligible CPGs using the appraisal of guidelines for research, and evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. Seventeen CPGs meeting our inclusion criteria were included. Among them, 16 CPGs were focused on the genetic diagnosis/evaluation of diseases, while only 1 CPG was focused on pharmacogenetics. The median domain scores from highest to lowest were: scope and purpose 80.56% (range: 56.95%–87.50%), clarity of presentation 72.22% (range: 45.83%–88.89%), stakeholder involvement 45.83% (range: 27.78%–55.56%), applicability 31.25% (range: 19.79%–54.17%), rigor of development 21.88%, (range: 13.02%–71.88%), and editorial independence 18.75% (range: 0%–83.33%). According to the overall quality, 6 (35%) CPGs were “not recommended,” 8 (47%) CPGs were “recommended with modifications,” and only 3 (18%) CPGs were “recommended.” The clinical topics of the “recommended” CPGs were warfarin, familial Mediterranean fever, and pediatric pulmonary arterial hypertension. The quality of CPGs for genetic testing in children was generally low, and variable across different CPGs and different AGREE II domains. In future guideline development, more attention should be paid to the aspects of stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, applicability, and editorial independence. Not only will guideline users benefit from our results when determining whether to adopt related CPGs to guide genetic testing in children, but guideline developers could also take into account our results to improve the quality of future CPGs. Wolters Kluwer Health 2019-12-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6946213/ /pubmed/31876744 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000018521 Text en Copyright © 2019 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC), where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
spellingShingle 6200
Jiao, Xue-Feng
Li, Hai-Long
Cheng, Liang
Zhang, Chuan
Yang, Chun-Song
Han, Jonathan
Yi, Qiu-Sha
Chen, Zhe
Zeng, Li-Nan
Zhang, Ling-Li
Methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines for genetic testing in children: A systematic assessment using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II instrument
title Methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines for genetic testing in children: A systematic assessment using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II instrument
title_full Methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines for genetic testing in children: A systematic assessment using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II instrument
title_fullStr Methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines for genetic testing in children: A systematic assessment using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II instrument
title_full_unstemmed Methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines for genetic testing in children: A systematic assessment using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II instrument
title_short Methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines for genetic testing in children: A systematic assessment using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II instrument
title_sort methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines for genetic testing in children: a systematic assessment using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation ii instrument
topic 6200
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6946213/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31876744
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000018521
work_keys_str_mv AT jiaoxuefeng methodologicalqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesforgenetictestinginchildrenasystematicassessmentusingtheappraisalofguidelinesforresearchandevaluationiiinstrument
AT lihailong methodologicalqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesforgenetictestinginchildrenasystematicassessmentusingtheappraisalofguidelinesforresearchandevaluationiiinstrument
AT chengliang methodologicalqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesforgenetictestinginchildrenasystematicassessmentusingtheappraisalofguidelinesforresearchandevaluationiiinstrument
AT zhangchuan methodologicalqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesforgenetictestinginchildrenasystematicassessmentusingtheappraisalofguidelinesforresearchandevaluationiiinstrument
AT yangchunsong methodologicalqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesforgenetictestinginchildrenasystematicassessmentusingtheappraisalofguidelinesforresearchandevaluationiiinstrument
AT hanjonathan methodologicalqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesforgenetictestinginchildrenasystematicassessmentusingtheappraisalofguidelinesforresearchandevaluationiiinstrument
AT yiqiusha methodologicalqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesforgenetictestinginchildrenasystematicassessmentusingtheappraisalofguidelinesforresearchandevaluationiiinstrument
AT chenzhe methodologicalqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesforgenetictestinginchildrenasystematicassessmentusingtheappraisalofguidelinesforresearchandevaluationiiinstrument
AT zenglinan methodologicalqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesforgenetictestinginchildrenasystematicassessmentusingtheappraisalofguidelinesforresearchandevaluationiiinstrument
AT zhanglingli methodologicalqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesforgenetictestinginchildrenasystematicassessmentusingtheappraisalofguidelinesforresearchandevaluationiiinstrument