基于AGREEⅡ及RIGHT的儿童孤独症诊疗指南/共识质量评价研究OA北大核心CSTPCD
Quality evaluation of childhood autism guidelines/consensus based on AGREE Ⅱ and RIGHT
目的 评估已发表的儿童孤独症(CA)诊疗指南/共识的方法学质量和报告质量情况,为我国CA诊疗指南和共识的制订提供建议.方法 检索中国知网(CNKI)、万方数据(Wanfang Data)、中国生物医学文献数据库(SinoMed)、医脉通(Medlive)、PubMed、英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)、美国国家指南库(NGC)、苏格兰校际指南网络(SIGN)等数据库收录的国内外CA诊疗指南/共识(时间截至2024年2月1日),由两位研究人员分别独立使用指南的研究和评估工具第二版(AGREE Ⅱ)和国际实践指南报告规范(RIGHT)评价纳入指南/共识的方法学质量及报告质量,并进一步使用RIGHT对国内外指南/共识的报告质量进行比较.结果 通过文献筛选,最终纳入19篇CA诊疗指南/共识,其中指南11篇,共识7篇,专家建议1篇;国内9篇,国外10篇.采用AGREE Ⅱ评价19篇指南/共识的6个领域得分率分别为范围和目的(91.1%±4.5%)、参与人员(86.8%±6.7%)、严谨性(83.0%±10.2%)、清晰性(84.3%±6.2%)、应用性(82.7%±13.3%)、编辑的独立性(65.4%±21.8%).采用RIGHT清单评价19篇指南/共识的7个领域报告率分别为基本信息(87.6%±11.0%)、背景(87.6%±13.8%)、证据(81.1%±22.6%)、推荐意见(71.1%±38.4%)、评审和质量保证(83.5%±16.7%)、资助与利益冲突(48.7%±29.4%)、其他(64.4%±11.8%).从方法学质量来看,"编辑的独立性"领域得分率最低;从报告质量来看,"资助和利益冲突"领域报告率最低.从国内外指南/共识条目报告率来看,国内条目报告率(26.2%±1.5%)明显低于国外条目报告率(52.6%±2.2%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).结论 当前CA诊疗指南/共识的总体质量仍有待改进,在制订及报告指南的过程中,应明确报告资金来源和利益冲突,严格按照AGREE Ⅱ和RIGHT制订.
Objective To evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of published guidelines/consensus for childhood autism(CA),providing a basis for formulating domestic CA guidelines.Methods We searched databases including CNKI,Wanfang Data,SinoMed,Medlive,PubMed,national institute of health and clinical excellence(NICE),national guideline clearinghouse(NGC),and Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network(SIGN)for Chinese and foreign guideline/consensus on childhood autism published before February 1,2024.Two researchers independently evaluated the methodology and reporting quality of the guideline/consensus using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation Ⅱ(AGREE Ⅱ)and Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare(RIGHT)tools.Results After literature screening,19 CA guidelines/consensus were included,comprising 11 guidelines,7 consensus,and 1 expert recommendation,with 9 domestic and 10 foreign articles.The AGREE Ⅱ evaluation scores for the six domains were as follows:scope and purpose(91.1％±4.5％),stakeholder involvement(86.8％±6.7％),rigour of development(83.0％±10.2％),clarity of presentation(84.3％±6.2％),applicability(82.7％±13.3％),and editorial independence(65.4％±21.8％).The RIGHT checklist reported rates for the seven domains were:basic information(87.6％±11.0％),background(87.6％±13.8％),evidence(81.1％±22.6％),recommendation(71.1％±38.4％),review and quality assurance(83.5％±16.7％),funding and declaration and management of interests(48.7％±29.4％),and other information(64.4％±11.8％).The domain with the lowest score for methodological quality was"editorial independence"and for reporting quality,it was"funding and declaration and management of interests".The reporting rate of domestic articles(26.2％±1.5％)was significantly lower than that of foreign articles(52.6％±2.2％),with a statistically significant difference(P<0.05).Conclusion The overall quality of current childhood autism guidelines/consensus requires improvement.During the formulation and reporting of guidelines/consensus,strictly adhering to AGREE Ⅱ and RIGHT is imperative,and it is essential to clearly report funding sources and conflicts of interest.
邓辉;王梦琪;孟祥然;龙政莉;曹雪;刘佳
陕西中医药大学针灸推拿学院,陕西咸阳 712000||中国中医科学院中医临床基础医学研究所,北京 100700中国中医科学院中医临床基础医学研究所,北京 100700
临床医学
儿童孤独症指南共识质量评价
childhood autismguidelineconsensusquality evaluation
《解放军医学杂志》 2024 (009)
977-985 / 9
This work was supported by the Science and Technology Innovation Project of China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences(CI2021A00702-2) 中国中医科学院科技创新工程项目(CI2021A00702-2)
评论