GRADE母胎护理实践指南的特点和质量评价。

IF 1.2 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Andelys De la Rosa, Patxis Taveras, Reveiz Ludovic, Torres Ana Marcela, Mordan José, López-Bencosme Yanely, Sánchez Fernández Salma Arisbel, Camilo Pantaleón Elsa, Buchanan Cecilia
{"title":"GRADE母胎护理实践指南的特点和质量评价。","authors":"Andelys De la Rosa, Patxis Taveras, Reveiz Ludovic, Torres Ana Marcela, Mordan José, López-Bencosme Yanely, Sánchez Fernández Salma Arisbel, Camilo Pantaleón Elsa, Buchanan Cecilia","doi":"10.5867/medwave.2025.03.2937","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The study aimed to assess the quality and applicability of current maternal-fetal health clinical practice guidelines that countries can adopt or adapt. A systematic search was conducted in the International Database of GRADE Guidelines (BIGG) for practice guidelines developed with the GRADE system (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) and related to maternal-fetal care. The selected guidelines were evaluated with the AGREE-REX (Appraisal of Guidelines REsearch and Evaluation-Recommendations Excellence) tool to assess clinical applicability (domain-1), values and preferences (domain-2) and applicability (domain-3). The variables were presented descriptively, and a statistical analysis was performed on the domains according to institution and country of origin. Of 1,212 clinical practice guidelines, 72 met the inclusion criteria. According to the type of collaborating organization, the World Health Organization predominated with 58.3%, versus specialized medical societies. Domain 1, \"Clinical applicability,\" was the best rated by the reviewers (68.5%) compared to domain 2, \"Values and preferences\" (60%). According to the type of institution that developed the clinical practice guideline, a significant difference was demonstrated in domains 1 (p= 0.000), 2 (p= 0.006) and 3 (p= 0.000). Only domains 1 (p= 0.000) and 3 (p= 0.018) were statistically significant based on country of origin. This study emphasizes the importance of improving the quality of maternal-fetal clinical practice guidelines developed by organizations and governmental institutions and the need to strengthen the institutionalization of the use of evidence to develop, adapt and implement practice guidelines in countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Spain, Colombia, the United States, among others.</p>","PeriodicalId":18597,"journal":{"name":"Medwave","volume":"25 3","pages":"e2937"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Characteristics and quality assessment of GRADE practice guidelines on maternal-fetal care.\",\"authors\":\"Andelys De la Rosa, Patxis Taveras, Reveiz Ludovic, Torres Ana Marcela, Mordan José, López-Bencosme Yanely, Sánchez Fernández Salma Arisbel, Camilo Pantaleón Elsa, Buchanan Cecilia\",\"doi\":\"10.5867/medwave.2025.03.2937\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The study aimed to assess the quality and applicability of current maternal-fetal health clinical practice guidelines that countries can adopt or adapt. A systematic search was conducted in the International Database of GRADE Guidelines (BIGG) for practice guidelines developed with the GRADE system (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) and related to maternal-fetal care. The selected guidelines were evaluated with the AGREE-REX (Appraisal of Guidelines REsearch and Evaluation-Recommendations Excellence) tool to assess clinical applicability (domain-1), values and preferences (domain-2) and applicability (domain-3). The variables were presented descriptively, and a statistical analysis was performed on the domains according to institution and country of origin. Of 1,212 clinical practice guidelines, 72 met the inclusion criteria. According to the type of collaborating organization, the World Health Organization predominated with 58.3%, versus specialized medical societies. Domain 1, \\\"Clinical applicability,\\\" was the best rated by the reviewers (68.5%) compared to domain 2, \\\"Values and preferences\\\" (60%). According to the type of institution that developed the clinical practice guideline, a significant difference was demonstrated in domains 1 (p= 0.000), 2 (p= 0.006) and 3 (p= 0.000). Only domains 1 (p= 0.000) and 3 (p= 0.018) were statistically significant based on country of origin. This study emphasizes the importance of improving the quality of maternal-fetal clinical practice guidelines developed by organizations and governmental institutions and the need to strengthen the institutionalization of the use of evidence to develop, adapt and implement practice guidelines in countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Spain, Colombia, the United States, among others.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18597,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medwave\",\"volume\":\"25 3\",\"pages\":\"e2937\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medwave\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2025.03.2937\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medwave","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2025.03.2937","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

该研究旨在评估各国可采用或调整的现行母胎健康临床实践指南的质量和适用性。在国际分级指南数据库(BIGG)中进行了系统搜索,以获取与分级推荐、评估、发展和评估系统(GRADE system)相关的母胎护理实践指南。使用AGREE-REX(评价指南研究和评价建议卓越性)工具对所选指南进行评估,以评估临床适用性(领域1)、价值和偏好(领域2)和适用性(领域3)。对变量进行了描述性描述,并根据机构和原产国对域进行了统计分析。在1212份临床实践指南中,72份符合纳入标准。根据合作组织的类型,世界卫生组织占58.3%,而专业医学协会占58.3%。领域1,“临床适用性”,与领域2,“价值和偏好”(60%)相比,被评论者评价得最好(68.5%)。根据制定临床实践指南的机构类型,域1 (p= 0.000)、域2 (p= 0.006)和域3 (p= 0.000)显示出显著差异。根据原产国,只有域1 (p= 0.000)和域3 (p= 0.018)具有统计学意义。本研究强调了提高组织和政府机构制定的母胎临床实践指南质量的重要性,以及在英国、加拿大、西班牙、哥伦比亚、美国等国加强使用证据制定、调整和实施实践指南的制度化的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Characteristics and quality assessment of GRADE practice guidelines on maternal-fetal care.

The study aimed to assess the quality and applicability of current maternal-fetal health clinical practice guidelines that countries can adopt or adapt. A systematic search was conducted in the International Database of GRADE Guidelines (BIGG) for practice guidelines developed with the GRADE system (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) and related to maternal-fetal care. The selected guidelines were evaluated with the AGREE-REX (Appraisal of Guidelines REsearch and Evaluation-Recommendations Excellence) tool to assess clinical applicability (domain-1), values and preferences (domain-2) and applicability (domain-3). The variables were presented descriptively, and a statistical analysis was performed on the domains according to institution and country of origin. Of 1,212 clinical practice guidelines, 72 met the inclusion criteria. According to the type of collaborating organization, the World Health Organization predominated with 58.3%, versus specialized medical societies. Domain 1, "Clinical applicability," was the best rated by the reviewers (68.5%) compared to domain 2, "Values and preferences" (60%). According to the type of institution that developed the clinical practice guideline, a significant difference was demonstrated in domains 1 (p= 0.000), 2 (p= 0.006) and 3 (p= 0.000). Only domains 1 (p= 0.000) and 3 (p= 0.018) were statistically significant based on country of origin. This study emphasizes the importance of improving the quality of maternal-fetal clinical practice guidelines developed by organizations and governmental institutions and the need to strengthen the institutionalization of the use of evidence to develop, adapt and implement practice guidelines in countries such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Spain, Colombia, the United States, among others.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medwave
Medwave MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
8.30%
发文量
50
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medwave is a peer-reviewed, biomedical and public health journal. Since its foundation in 2001 (Volume 1) it has always been an online only, open access publication that does not charge subscription or reader fees. Since January 2011 (Volume 11, Number 1), all articles are peer-reviewed. Without losing sight of the importance of evidence-based approach and methodological soundness, the journal accepts for publication articles that focus on providing updates for clinical practice, review and analysis articles on topics such as ethics, public health and health policy; clinical, social and economic health determinants; clinical and health research findings from all of the major disciplines of medicine, medical science and public health. The journal does not publish basic science manuscripts or experiments conducted on animals. Until March 2013, Medwave was publishing 11-12 numbers a year. Each issue would be posted on the homepage on day 1 of each month, except for Chile’s summer holiday when the issue would cover two months. Starting from April 2013, Medwave adopted the continuous mode of publication, which means that the copyedited accepted articles are posted on the journal’s homepage as they are ready. They are then collated in the respective issue and included in the Past Issues section.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信