Cargando…
Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on lung cancer using the RIGHT checklist
BACKGROUND: In recent years, the number of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for lung cancer has increased, but the quality of these guidelines has not been systematically assessed so far. Our aim was to assess the reporting quality of CPGs on lung cancer published since 2018 using the Internation...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
AME Publishing Company
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8264321/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34295664 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tlcr-21-405 |
_version_ | 1783719528754053120 |
---|---|
author | Yang, Yongjie Lu, Jingli Ma, Yanfang Xi, Chen Kang, Jian Zhang, Qiwen Jia, Xuedong Liu, Kefeng Du, Shuzhang Kocher, Florian Seeber, Andreas Gridelli, Cesare Provencio, Mariano Seki, Nobuhiko Tomita, Yusuke Zhang, Xiaojian |
author_facet | Yang, Yongjie Lu, Jingli Ma, Yanfang Xi, Chen Kang, Jian Zhang, Qiwen Jia, Xuedong Liu, Kefeng Du, Shuzhang Kocher, Florian Seeber, Andreas Gridelli, Cesare Provencio, Mariano Seki, Nobuhiko Tomita, Yusuke Zhang, Xiaojian |
author_sort | Yang, Yongjie |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In recent years, the number of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for lung cancer has increased, but the quality of these guidelines has not been systematically assessed so far. Our aim was to assess the reporting quality of CPGs on lung cancer published since 2018 using the International Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Health Care (RIGHT) instrument. METHODS: We systematically searched the major electronic literature databases, guideline databases and medical society websites from January 2018 to November 2020 to identify all CPGs for small cell and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The search and extraction were completed using standardized forms. The quality of included guidelines was evaluated using the RIGHT statement. We present the results descriptively, including a stratification by selected determinants. RESULTS: A total of 49 CPGs were included. The mean proportion across the guidelines of the 22 items of the RIGHT checklist that were appropriately reported was 57.9%. The items most common to be poorly reported were quality assurance (item 17) and description of the role of funders (item 18b), both of which were reported in only one guideline. The proportions of items within each of the seven domains of the RIGHT checklist that were correctly reported were Basic information 75.9%; background 83.2%; evidence 44.5%; recommendations 55.4%; review and quality assurance 12.2%; funding and declaration and management of interests 42.9%; and other information 38.1%. The reporting quality of guidelines did not differ between publication years. CPGs published in journals with impact factor >30 tended to be best reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our results revealed that reporting in CPGs for lung cancer is suboptimal. Particularly the declaration of funding and quality assurance are poorly reported in recent CPGs on lung cancer. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8264321 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | AME Publishing Company |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82643212021-07-21 Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on lung cancer using the RIGHT checklist Yang, Yongjie Lu, Jingli Ma, Yanfang Xi, Chen Kang, Jian Zhang, Qiwen Jia, Xuedong Liu, Kefeng Du, Shuzhang Kocher, Florian Seeber, Andreas Gridelli, Cesare Provencio, Mariano Seki, Nobuhiko Tomita, Yusuke Zhang, Xiaojian Transl Lung Cancer Res Original Article BACKGROUND: In recent years, the number of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for lung cancer has increased, but the quality of these guidelines has not been systematically assessed so far. Our aim was to assess the reporting quality of CPGs on lung cancer published since 2018 using the International Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Health Care (RIGHT) instrument. METHODS: We systematically searched the major electronic literature databases, guideline databases and medical society websites from January 2018 to November 2020 to identify all CPGs for small cell and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The search and extraction were completed using standardized forms. The quality of included guidelines was evaluated using the RIGHT statement. We present the results descriptively, including a stratification by selected determinants. RESULTS: A total of 49 CPGs were included. The mean proportion across the guidelines of the 22 items of the RIGHT checklist that were appropriately reported was 57.9%. The items most common to be poorly reported were quality assurance (item 17) and description of the role of funders (item 18b), both of which were reported in only one guideline. The proportions of items within each of the seven domains of the RIGHT checklist that were correctly reported were Basic information 75.9%; background 83.2%; evidence 44.5%; recommendations 55.4%; review and quality assurance 12.2%; funding and declaration and management of interests 42.9%; and other information 38.1%. The reporting quality of guidelines did not differ between publication years. CPGs published in journals with impact factor >30 tended to be best reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our results revealed that reporting in CPGs for lung cancer is suboptimal. Particularly the declaration of funding and quality assurance are poorly reported in recent CPGs on lung cancer. AME Publishing Company 2021-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8264321/ /pubmed/34295664 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tlcr-21-405 Text en 2021 Translational Lung Cancer Research. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Yang, Yongjie Lu, Jingli Ma, Yanfang Xi, Chen Kang, Jian Zhang, Qiwen Jia, Xuedong Liu, Kefeng Du, Shuzhang Kocher, Florian Seeber, Andreas Gridelli, Cesare Provencio, Mariano Seki, Nobuhiko Tomita, Yusuke Zhang, Xiaojian Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on lung cancer using the RIGHT checklist |
title | Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on lung cancer using the RIGHT checklist |
title_full | Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on lung cancer using the RIGHT checklist |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on lung cancer using the RIGHT checklist |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on lung cancer using the RIGHT checklist |
title_short | Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on lung cancer using the RIGHT checklist |
title_sort | evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on lung cancer using the right checklist |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8264321/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34295664 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tlcr-21-405 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yangyongjie evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT lujingli evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT mayanfang evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT xichen evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT kangjian evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT zhangqiwen evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT jiaxuedong evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT liukefeng evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT dushuzhang evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT kocherflorian evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT seeberandreas evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT gridellicesare evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT provenciomariano evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT sekinobuhiko evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT tomitayusuke evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist AT zhangxiaojian evaluationofthereportingqualityofclinicalpracticeguidelinesonlungcancerusingtherightchecklist |