首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Epidemiology >Systematic review of current guideline appraisals performed with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II instrument—a third of AGREE II users apply a cut-off for guideline quality
【24h】

Systematic review of current guideline appraisals performed with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II instrument—a third of AGREE II users apply a cut-off for guideline quality

机译:对当前指南评估的系统审查,并在研究方面的准则和AMP进行了评估; 评估II仪器 - 三分之一的II个人用户使用截止指南质量

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

ObjectivesTo investigate whether Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II users apply a cut-off based on standardized domain scores or overall guideline quality to distinguish between high- and low-quality guidelines, as well as to investigate which criteria they use to generate this cut-off and which type of cut-off they apply. Study Design and SettingWe conducted a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, DARE, and the HTA-database for German- and English-language studies appraising guidelines with AGREE II. Information on cut-offs was extracted and analyzed descriptively. ResultsWe identified 118 relevant publications. Thirty-nine (33%) used a cut-off, of which 24 (62%) used a 2-step and 13 (33%) used a 3-step approach. The cut-off for high quality lay between 50% and 70% (2-step) and 60% and 83% (3-step) of the highest possible rating. Twenty-four (62%) publications applied a cut-off based on standardized domain scores and 7 (18%) based on overall guideline quality. Eleven (28%) applied cut-offs to derive the recommendation for guideline use. ConclusionA third of AGREE II users apply a cut-off to distinguish between high- and low-quality guidelines, often without clearly describing how the cut-off is generated. Many users might welcome a clear distinction between high- and low-quality guidelines; specifying a cut-off for this purpose might be useful.
机译:ObjectiveSto调查了研究和评估指南(同意)II用户是否基于标准化域名或整体准则质量应用截止,以区分高质量和低质量的指导,以及调查他们使用的标准产生这种截止,它们适用于哪种类型的截止。研究设计和设置我们在Medline,Embase,Dare和HTA数据库中进行了系统的搜索,用于德语和英语研究评估指引II的指导方针。有关截止的信息已提取和分析。结果我们确定了118个相关出版物。三十九(33%)使用截止,其中24(62%)使用2步和13(33%)使用3步方法。高质量的截止值介于50%至70%(2步)和60%和83%(3步)的最高额定值。二十四(62%)出版物基于标准化结构域分数和7(18%)基于总体准则质量的截止。 11(28%)施加截止,以推导出指南使用的建议。结案第三个同意II用户申请截止以区分高质量和低质量的指导,通常不清楚地描述截止方式。许多用户可能会在高质量和低质量的指导方面进行清晰的区别;为此目的指定截止可能很有用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号