Benjamin Howard, Chris Chapman, Chase Meyer, Corbin Walters, Matt Vassar
{"title":"利用胃肠病学临床实践指南中医疗声明实践指南报告项目的报告完整性分析。","authors":"Benjamin Howard, Chris Chapman, Chase Meyer, Corbin Walters, Matt Vassar","doi":"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Assessing reporting quality is important as it allows distinctions to be made between poor methodology and poor reporting practices. The Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) Statement checklist was published in 2017 to improve the thoroughness and reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). CPGs are evidence-based recommendations developed to assist clinician decision-making in the diagnosis and management of patients. The aim of this study is to assess the completeness of reporting in CPGs listed by the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) and their frequency of reporting items listed in the RIGHT Statement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the 22 criteria (35 items) of the RIGHT Statement checklist, two researchers independently documented the adherence to each item for all eligible guidelines listed by the ACG. This study was conducted from 01/10/18 to 05/12/18. Data were recorded onto a prespecified Google data abstraction form and extracted into MS Excel for statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 38 eligible guidelines, nine of the 35 RIGHT (25.7%) checklist items were met with less than 50% adherence. The mean adherence was 26.8 (SD ± 9.5); median adherence was 30 (interquartile range 21.5-33.5). The publication dates ranged from 2007 to 2017 with seven of the guidelines (18.4%) published between 2007 and 2009, 11 (29%) published between 2010 and 2013, and 20 (52.6%) published between 2014 and 2017.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The completeness of reporting in CPGs listed by the ACG remains inadequate in several key areas. Poor adherence to items of the RIGHT Statement checklist demonstrates that there is area for improvement in reporting quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":55996,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare","volume":"17 3","pages":"173-178"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000174","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of completeness of reporting utilizing the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in Healthcare Statement in gastroenterology clinical practice guidelines.\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Howard, Chris Chapman, Chase Meyer, Corbin Walters, Matt Vassar\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000174\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Assessing reporting quality is important as it allows distinctions to be made between poor methodology and poor reporting practices. The Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) Statement checklist was published in 2017 to improve the thoroughness and reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). CPGs are evidence-based recommendations developed to assist clinician decision-making in the diagnosis and management of patients. The aim of this study is to assess the completeness of reporting in CPGs listed by the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) and their frequency of reporting items listed in the RIGHT Statement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the 22 criteria (35 items) of the RIGHT Statement checklist, two researchers independently documented the adherence to each item for all eligible guidelines listed by the ACG. This study was conducted from 01/10/18 to 05/12/18. Data were recorded onto a prespecified Google data abstraction form and extracted into MS Excel for statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 38 eligible guidelines, nine of the 35 RIGHT (25.7%) checklist items were met with less than 50% adherence. The mean adherence was 26.8 (SD ± 9.5); median adherence was 30 (interquartile range 21.5-33.5). The publication dates ranged from 2007 to 2017 with seven of the guidelines (18.4%) published between 2007 and 2009, 11 (29%) published between 2010 and 2013, and 20 (52.6%) published between 2014 and 2017.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The completeness of reporting in CPGs listed by the ACG remains inadequate in several key areas. Poor adherence to items of the RIGHT Statement checklist demonstrates that there is area for improvement in reporting quality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55996,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare\",\"volume\":\"17 3\",\"pages\":\"173-178\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000174\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000174\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000174","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Analysis of completeness of reporting utilizing the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in Healthcare Statement in gastroenterology clinical practice guidelines.
Aim: Assessing reporting quality is important as it allows distinctions to be made between poor methodology and poor reporting practices. The Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) Statement checklist was published in 2017 to improve the thoroughness and reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). CPGs are evidence-based recommendations developed to assist clinician decision-making in the diagnosis and management of patients. The aim of this study is to assess the completeness of reporting in CPGs listed by the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) and their frequency of reporting items listed in the RIGHT Statement.
Methods: Using the 22 criteria (35 items) of the RIGHT Statement checklist, two researchers independently documented the adherence to each item for all eligible guidelines listed by the ACG. This study was conducted from 01/10/18 to 05/12/18. Data were recorded onto a prespecified Google data abstraction form and extracted into MS Excel for statistical analysis.
Results: Out of 38 eligible guidelines, nine of the 35 RIGHT (25.7%) checklist items were met with less than 50% adherence. The mean adherence was 26.8 (SD ± 9.5); median adherence was 30 (interquartile range 21.5-33.5). The publication dates ranged from 2007 to 2017 with seven of the guidelines (18.4%) published between 2007 and 2009, 11 (29%) published between 2010 and 2013, and 20 (52.6%) published between 2014 and 2017.
Conclusion: The completeness of reporting in CPGs listed by the ACG remains inadequate in several key areas. Poor adherence to items of the RIGHT Statement checklist demonstrates that there is area for improvement in reporting quality.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare is the official journal of the Joanna Briggs Institute. It is a fully refereed journal that publishes manuscripts relating to evidence-based medicine and evidence-based practice. It publishes papers containing reliable evidence to assist health professionals in their evaluation and decision-making, and to inform health professionals, students and researchers of outcomes, debates and developments in evidence-based medicine and healthcare.
The journal provides a unique home for publication of systematic reviews (quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, economic, scoping and prevalence) and implementation projects including the synthesis, transfer and utilisation of evidence in clinical practice. Original scholarly work relating to the synthesis (translation science), transfer (distribution) and utilization (implementation science and evaluation) of evidence to inform multidisciplinary healthcare practice is considered for publication. The journal also publishes original scholarly commentary pieces relating to the generation and synthesis of evidence for practice and quality improvement, the use and evaluation of evidence in practice, and the process of conducting systematic reviews (methodology) which covers quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, economic, scoping and prevalence methods. In addition, the journal’s content includes implementation projects including the transfer and utilisation of evidence in clinical practice as well as providing a forum for the debate of issues surrounding evidence-based healthcare.