Cargando…
Using RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) to evaluate the reporting quality of WHO guidelines
BACKGROUND: Without adequate reporting of research, valuable time and resources are wasted. In the same vein, adequate reporting of practice guidelines to optimise patient care is equally important. Our study examines the quality of reporting of published WHO guidelines, over time, using the RIGHT (...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7341641/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32641144 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-00578-w |
_version_ | 1783555280504619008 |
---|---|
author | Wang, Xiaoqin Zhou, Qi Chen, Yaolong Yang, Nan Pottie, Kevin Xiao, Yujie Tong, Yajing Yao, Liang Wang, Qi Yang, Kehu Norris, Susan L. |
author_facet | Wang, Xiaoqin Zhou, Qi Chen, Yaolong Yang, Nan Pottie, Kevin Xiao, Yujie Tong, Yajing Yao, Liang Wang, Qi Yang, Kehu Norris, Susan L. |
author_sort | Wang, Xiaoqin |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Without adequate reporting of research, valuable time and resources are wasted. In the same vein, adequate reporting of practice guidelines to optimise patient care is equally important. Our study examines the quality of reporting of published WHO guidelines, over time, using the RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in HealThcare) reporting checklist. METHODS: We examined English-language guidelines approved by the WHO Guidelines Review Committee from inception of the committee in 2007 until 31 December 2017. Pairs of independent, trained reviewers assessed the reporting quality of these guidelines. Descriptive data were summarised with frequencies and percentages. RESULTS: We included 182 eligible guidelines. Overall, 25 out of the 34 RIGHT items were reported in 75% or more of the WHO guidelines. The reporting rates improved over time. Further, 90% of the guidelines reported document type in the title. The identification of evidence, the rationale for recommendations and the review process were reported in more than 80% of guidelines. The certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was assessed in 81% of the guidelines assessed. While 82% of guidelines reported funding sources, only 25% mentioned the role of funders. CONCLUSIONS: WHO guidelines provide adequate reporting of many of the RIGHT items and reporting has improved over time. WHO guidelines compare favourably to guidelines produced by other organisations. However, reporting can be further improved in a number of areas. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7341641 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73416412020-07-14 Using RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) to evaluate the reporting quality of WHO guidelines Wang, Xiaoqin Zhou, Qi Chen, Yaolong Yang, Nan Pottie, Kevin Xiao, Yujie Tong, Yajing Yao, Liang Wang, Qi Yang, Kehu Norris, Susan L. Health Res Policy Syst Research BACKGROUND: Without adequate reporting of research, valuable time and resources are wasted. In the same vein, adequate reporting of practice guidelines to optimise patient care is equally important. Our study examines the quality of reporting of published WHO guidelines, over time, using the RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in HealThcare) reporting checklist. METHODS: We examined English-language guidelines approved by the WHO Guidelines Review Committee from inception of the committee in 2007 until 31 December 2017. Pairs of independent, trained reviewers assessed the reporting quality of these guidelines. Descriptive data were summarised with frequencies and percentages. RESULTS: We included 182 eligible guidelines. Overall, 25 out of the 34 RIGHT items were reported in 75% or more of the WHO guidelines. The reporting rates improved over time. Further, 90% of the guidelines reported document type in the title. The identification of evidence, the rationale for recommendations and the review process were reported in more than 80% of guidelines. The certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was assessed in 81% of the guidelines assessed. While 82% of guidelines reported funding sources, only 25% mentioned the role of funders. CONCLUSIONS: WHO guidelines provide adequate reporting of many of the RIGHT items and reporting has improved over time. WHO guidelines compare favourably to guidelines produced by other organisations. However, reporting can be further improved in a number of areas. BioMed Central 2020-07-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7341641/ /pubmed/32641144 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-00578-w Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Wang, Xiaoqin Zhou, Qi Chen, Yaolong Yang, Nan Pottie, Kevin Xiao, Yujie Tong, Yajing Yao, Liang Wang, Qi Yang, Kehu Norris, Susan L. Using RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) to evaluate the reporting quality of WHO guidelines |
title | Using RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) to evaluate the reporting quality of WHO guidelines |
title_full | Using RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) to evaluate the reporting quality of WHO guidelines |
title_fullStr | Using RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) to evaluate the reporting quality of WHO guidelines |
title_full_unstemmed | Using RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) to evaluate the reporting quality of WHO guidelines |
title_short | Using RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) to evaluate the reporting quality of WHO guidelines |
title_sort | using right (reporting items for practice guidelines in healthcare) to evaluate the reporting quality of who guidelines |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7341641/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32641144 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-00578-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wangxiaoqin usingrightreportingitemsforpracticeguidelinesinhealthcaretoevaluatethereportingqualityofwhoguidelines AT zhouqi usingrightreportingitemsforpracticeguidelinesinhealthcaretoevaluatethereportingqualityofwhoguidelines AT chenyaolong usingrightreportingitemsforpracticeguidelinesinhealthcaretoevaluatethereportingqualityofwhoguidelines AT yangnan usingrightreportingitemsforpracticeguidelinesinhealthcaretoevaluatethereportingqualityofwhoguidelines AT pottiekevin usingrightreportingitemsforpracticeguidelinesinhealthcaretoevaluatethereportingqualityofwhoguidelines AT xiaoyujie usingrightreportingitemsforpracticeguidelinesinhealthcaretoevaluatethereportingqualityofwhoguidelines AT tongyajing usingrightreportingitemsforpracticeguidelinesinhealthcaretoevaluatethereportingqualityofwhoguidelines AT yaoliang usingrightreportingitemsforpracticeguidelinesinhealthcaretoevaluatethereportingqualityofwhoguidelines AT wangqi usingrightreportingitemsforpracticeguidelinesinhealthcaretoevaluatethereportingqualityofwhoguidelines AT yangkehu usingrightreportingitemsforpracticeguidelinesinhealthcaretoevaluatethereportingqualityofwhoguidelines AT norrissusanl usingrightreportingitemsforpracticeguidelinesinhealthcaretoevaluatethereportingqualityofwhoguidelines |