From: Systematic assessment of the quality of osteoporosis guidelines
Quality Criteria* | % CPGs where 2 or more appraisers said "yes" | |
---|---|---|
Items included in Dimension 1: Rigour of Method Development | ||
1 | Is the agency responsible for the development and/or endorsement of the guidelines clearly identified? | 95.2 |
2 | Was funding or other support received for developing the guidelines? | 38.1 |
3 | If funding or other support was received, is there evidence that the potential biases of the funding body(ies) were taken into account? | 14.3 |
4 | Is there a description of the individuals (e.g. professionals, interest groups – including patients) who were involved in the guidelines development group? | 85.7 |
5 | If so, did the group contain representatives of all key disciplines? | 23.8 |
6 | Is there a description of the sources of information used to select the evidence on which the recommendations are based? | 5.0 |
7 | If so, are the sources of information adequate? | 5.0 |
8 | Is there a description of the method(s) used to interpret and assess the strength of the evidence? | 38.1 |
9 | If so, is(are) the method(s) for rating the evidence satisfactory? | 23.5 |
10 | Is there a description of the methods used to formulate the recommendations? | 28.5 |
11 | If so, are the methods satisfactory? | 9.6 |
12 | Is there an indication of how the views of interested parties not on the panel (or the consensus conference participants) were taken into account? | 19.6 |
13 | Is there an explicit link between the major recommendations and the level of supporting evidence? | 28.5 |
14 | Did the guidelines receive an independent external review prior to their publication/release? | 28.6 |
15 | If so, is explicit information given about methods and how comments were addressed? | 0 |
16 | Were the guidelines piloted? | 0 |
17 | If the guidelines were piloted, is explicit information given about the methods used and the results adopted? | 0 |
18 | Is there a mention of a date for reviewing or updating the guideline? | 19.1 |
19 | Is the body responsible for the reviewing and updating clearly identified? | 19.0 |
20 | Overall, have the potential biases of guideline development been adequately dealt with, i.e. have they attempted to minimize the introduction of bias adequately? | 14.3 |
Items included in Dimension 2: Context and Content | ||
21 | Are the reasons for developing the guidelines clearly stated? | 90.5 |
22 | Are the objectives of the guidelines clearly defined? | 61.9 |
23 | Is there a satisfactory description of the patients to which the guidelines are meant to apply? | 81.0 |
24 | Is there a description of the circumstances (clinical or non-clinical) in which exceptions might be made in using the guidelines? | 28.5 |
25 | Is there an explicit statement of how patient preferences should be taken into account in applying the guidelines? | 14.3 |
26 | Do the guidelines describe the condition to be detected, treated, or prevented in unambiguous terms? | 95.3 |
27 | Are there different possible options for management of the condition clearly stated in the guidelines? | 90.4 |
28 | Are the recommendations clearly presented? | 85.7 |
29 | Is there an adequate description of the health benefits that are likely to be gained from the recommended management? | 76.2 |
30 | Is there an adequate description of the potential harms or risks that may occur as a result of the recommended management? | 61.9 |
31 | Is there an estimate of the costs or expenditures likely to incur from the recommended management? | 33.4 |
32 | Are the recommendations supported by the estimated benefits, harms and costs of the intervention? | 9.6 |
Items included in Dimension 3: Application | ||
33 | Does the guideline document suggest possible methods for dissemination and implementation? | 9.6 |
34 | Does the guideline document specify criteria for monitoring adherence to the guidelines? | 9.6 |
35 | Does the guideline document identify clear standards or targets for adherence to the guidelines? | 4.8 |
36 | Does the guideline document define measurable outcomes (e.g. health, process, economic, outcomes) that can be monitored? | 0 |
37 | Does the guideline document identify key elements which need to be considered by local guideline groups? | 0 |