Do the clinical practice guidelines for paediatric dentistry meet the quality standards? A meta‐research and quality appraisal using the AGREE II tool
Background Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) enhance health care and aid clinicians' decisions. Aim To evaluate the quality of clinical guidelines in paediatric dentistry using the AGREE II tool. Design PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, LIVIVO, Lilacs, international guidelines websites, scientific soci...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of paediatric dentistry 2024-07, Vol.34 (4), p.360-371 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 371 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 360 |
| container_title | International journal of paediatric dentistry |
| container_volume | 34 |
| creator | Elagami, Rokaia Ahmed Laux, Caroline Mariano Gallegos, Claudia López Tedesco, Tamara Kerber Cóvos, Thais Gimenez Braga, Mariana Minatel Mendes, Fausto Medeiros Cenci, Maximiliano Sérgio Raggio, Daniela Prócida |
| description | Background
Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) enhance health care and aid clinicians' decisions.
Aim
To evaluate the quality of clinical guidelines in paediatric dentistry using the AGREE II tool.
Design
PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, LIVIVO, Lilacs, international guidelines websites, scientific societies, and gray literature were searched until September 2021. We included paediatric dental clinical guidelines and excluded drafts or guidelines for patients with special needs. Two independent reviewers performed quality assessment using the APPRAISAL OF GUIDELINES FOR RESEARCH & EVALUATION II (AGREE II) instrument. We calculated the mean overall domain scores (95% confidence interval) for each guideline. We used regression analysis to correlate the score of overall assessment and the six domains of AGREE II with guideline characteristics.
Results
Forty‐four guidelines were included in this study. Highest mean score was for Domain 4 (Clarity of Presentation; 58%, 95% CI: 50.8–64.9), whereas the lowest was for Domain 5 (Applicability; 16%, 95% CI: 10.8–21.4). The reporting quality was improved in Domains 1–5 with reporting checklists (p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/ipd.13133 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2892271250</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2892271250</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3483-89b047a5390cfa92b55d6c1dfcadf005b9d4ccf74ad4c6d8aace93a224b229d93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc9u1DAQhy0EokvhwAsgS1zKIa3_xEl8Qqt2KStVAiGQuFkTe9K6yiap7QjtjUfgyPPxJHV32x6Q6stIns_fjPUj5C1nxzyfEz-5Yy65lM_IgstKFaKSP5-TBdMVK-pS6gPyKsZrxrhigr0kB7LWTdnIakH-no00XSG1vR-8hZ5OAWzyFunl7B3mW4y0GwOdAJ2HFLylDofkYwpbukFMu-c3M_Q-bWlMMDgILn6ky9xN8O_3n4ARIdgrmluPIEx5kI954Bz9cLmTLM-_rVZ0vaZpHPvX5EUHfcQ39_WQ_Pi0-n76ubj4cr4-XV4UVuYfFI1uWVmDkprZDrRolXKV5a6z4DrGVKtdaW1Xl5Br5RoAi1qCEGUrhHZaHpKjvXcK482MMZmNjxb7HgYc52hEo4WouVAso-__Q6_HOQx5OyNZpbjUSqlMfdhTNowxBuzMFPwGwtZwZu7iMjkus4srs-_ujXO7QfdIPuSTgZM98Mv3uH3aZNZfz_bKW82gocQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3065139555</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Do the clinical practice guidelines for paediatric dentistry meet the quality standards? A meta‐research and quality appraisal using the AGREE II tool</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Elagami, Rokaia Ahmed ; Laux, Caroline Mariano ; Gallegos, Claudia López ; Tedesco, Tamara Kerber ; Cóvos, Thais Gimenez ; Braga, Mariana Minatel ; Mendes, Fausto Medeiros ; Cenci, Maximiliano Sérgio ; Raggio, Daniela Prócida</creator><creatorcontrib>Elagami, Rokaia Ahmed ; Laux, Caroline Mariano ; Gallegos, Claudia López ; Tedesco, Tamara Kerber ; Cóvos, Thais Gimenez ; Braga, Mariana Minatel ; Mendes, Fausto Medeiros ; Cenci, Maximiliano Sérgio ; Raggio, Daniela Prócida</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) enhance health care and aid clinicians' decisions.
Aim
To evaluate the quality of clinical guidelines in paediatric dentistry using the AGREE II tool.
Design
PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, LIVIVO, Lilacs, international guidelines websites, scientific societies, and gray literature were searched until September 2021. We included paediatric dental clinical guidelines and excluded drafts or guidelines for patients with special needs. Two independent reviewers performed quality assessment using the APPRAISAL OF GUIDELINES FOR RESEARCH & EVALUATION II (AGREE II) instrument. We calculated the mean overall domain scores (95% confidence interval) for each guideline. We used regression analysis to correlate the score of overall assessment and the six domains of AGREE II with guideline characteristics.
Results
Forty‐four guidelines were included in this study. Highest mean score was for Domain 4 (Clarity of Presentation; 58%, 95% CI: 50.8–64.9), whereas the lowest was for Domain 5 (Applicability; 16%, 95% CI: 10.8–21.4). The reporting quality was improved in Domains 1–5 with reporting checklists (p < .001), whereas that of Domain 6 was improved by decreasing years since publication (p = .047).
Conclusion
Paediatric dental guidelines do not comply with the methodological quality standard, especially in Domain 5 (Applicability). The AGREE reporting checklist should be implemented with a system to evaluate the certainty of evidence for future guidelines.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0960-7439</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1365-263X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-263X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/ipd.13133</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37984836</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>AGREE II tool ; Check lists ; Checklist ; Child ; Clinical medicine ; Clinical practice guidelines ; Dentistry ; Humans ; meta‐research ; paediatric dentistry ; Pediatric Dentistry - standards ; Pediatrics ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; quality appraisal ; Quality control ; Regression analysis</subject><ispartof>International journal of paediatric dentistry, 2024-07, Vol.34 (4), p.360-371</ispartof><rights>2023 The Authors. published by BSPD, IAPD and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2023 The Authors. International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry published by BSPD, IAPD and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2023. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3483-89b047a5390cfa92b55d6c1dfcadf005b9d4ccf74ad4c6d8aace93a224b229d93</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-7238-4598 ; 0000-0003-1711-4103 ; 0000-0003-0794-1578</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fipd.13133$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fipd.13133$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37984836$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Elagami, Rokaia Ahmed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laux, Caroline Mariano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gallegos, Claudia López</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tedesco, Tamara Kerber</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cóvos, Thais Gimenez</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Braga, Mariana Minatel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mendes, Fausto Medeiros</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cenci, Maximiliano Sérgio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raggio, Daniela Prócida</creatorcontrib><title>Do the clinical practice guidelines for paediatric dentistry meet the quality standards? A meta‐research and quality appraisal using the AGREE II tool</title><title>International journal of paediatric dentistry</title><addtitle>Int J Paediatr Dent</addtitle><description>Background
Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) enhance health care and aid clinicians' decisions.
Aim
To evaluate the quality of clinical guidelines in paediatric dentistry using the AGREE II tool.
Design
PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, LIVIVO, Lilacs, international guidelines websites, scientific societies, and gray literature were searched until September 2021. We included paediatric dental clinical guidelines and excluded drafts or guidelines for patients with special needs. Two independent reviewers performed quality assessment using the APPRAISAL OF GUIDELINES FOR RESEARCH & EVALUATION II (AGREE II) instrument. We calculated the mean overall domain scores (95% confidence interval) for each guideline. We used regression analysis to correlate the score of overall assessment and the six domains of AGREE II with guideline characteristics.
Results
Forty‐four guidelines were included in this study. Highest mean score was for Domain 4 (Clarity of Presentation; 58%, 95% CI: 50.8–64.9), whereas the lowest was for Domain 5 (Applicability; 16%, 95% CI: 10.8–21.4). The reporting quality was improved in Domains 1–5 with reporting checklists (p < .001), whereas that of Domain 6 was improved by decreasing years since publication (p = .047).
Conclusion
Paediatric dental guidelines do not comply with the methodological quality standard, especially in Domain 5 (Applicability). The AGREE reporting checklist should be implemented with a system to evaluate the certainty of evidence for future guidelines.</description><subject>AGREE II tool</subject><subject>Check lists</subject><subject>Checklist</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Clinical practice guidelines</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>meta‐research</subject><subject>paediatric dentistry</subject><subject>Pediatric Dentistry - standards</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><subject>Practice Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>quality appraisal</subject><subject>Quality control</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><issn>0960-7439</issn><issn>1365-263X</issn><issn>1365-263X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kc9u1DAQhy0EokvhwAsgS1zKIa3_xEl8Qqt2KStVAiGQuFkTe9K6yiap7QjtjUfgyPPxJHV32x6Q6stIns_fjPUj5C1nxzyfEz-5Yy65lM_IgstKFaKSP5-TBdMVK-pS6gPyKsZrxrhigr0kB7LWTdnIakH-no00XSG1vR-8hZ5OAWzyFunl7B3mW4y0GwOdAJ2HFLylDofkYwpbukFMu-c3M_Q-bWlMMDgILn6ky9xN8O_3n4ARIdgrmluPIEx5kI954Bz9cLmTLM-_rVZ0vaZpHPvX5EUHfcQ39_WQ_Pi0-n76ubj4cr4-XV4UVuYfFI1uWVmDkprZDrRolXKV5a6z4DrGVKtdaW1Xl5Br5RoAi1qCEGUrhHZaHpKjvXcK482MMZmNjxb7HgYc52hEo4WouVAso-__Q6_HOQx5OyNZpbjUSqlMfdhTNowxBuzMFPwGwtZwZu7iMjkus4srs-_ujXO7QfdIPuSTgZM98Mv3uH3aZNZfz_bKW82gocQ</recordid><startdate>202407</startdate><enddate>202407</enddate><creator>Elagami, Rokaia Ahmed</creator><creator>Laux, Caroline Mariano</creator><creator>Gallegos, Claudia López</creator><creator>Tedesco, Tamara Kerber</creator><creator>Cóvos, Thais Gimenez</creator><creator>Braga, Mariana Minatel</creator><creator>Mendes, Fausto Medeiros</creator><creator>Cenci, Maximiliano Sérgio</creator><creator>Raggio, Daniela Prócida</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7238-4598</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1711-4103</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0794-1578</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202407</creationdate><title>Do the clinical practice guidelines for paediatric dentistry meet the quality standards? A meta‐research and quality appraisal using the AGREE II tool</title><author>Elagami, Rokaia Ahmed ; Laux, Caroline Mariano ; Gallegos, Claudia López ; Tedesco, Tamara Kerber ; Cóvos, Thais Gimenez ; Braga, Mariana Minatel ; Mendes, Fausto Medeiros ; Cenci, Maximiliano Sérgio ; Raggio, Daniela Prócida</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3483-89b047a5390cfa92b55d6c1dfcadf005b9d4ccf74ad4c6d8aace93a224b229d93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>AGREE II tool</topic><topic>Check lists</topic><topic>Checklist</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Clinical practice guidelines</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>meta‐research</topic><topic>paediatric dentistry</topic><topic>Pediatric Dentistry - standards</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><topic>Practice Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>quality appraisal</topic><topic>Quality control</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Elagami, Rokaia Ahmed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laux, Caroline Mariano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gallegos, Claudia López</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tedesco, Tamara Kerber</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cóvos, Thais Gimenez</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Braga, Mariana Minatel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mendes, Fausto Medeiros</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cenci, Maximiliano Sérgio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raggio, Daniela Prócida</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal of paediatric dentistry</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Elagami, Rokaia Ahmed</au><au>Laux, Caroline Mariano</au><au>Gallegos, Claudia López</au><au>Tedesco, Tamara Kerber</au><au>Cóvos, Thais Gimenez</au><au>Braga, Mariana Minatel</au><au>Mendes, Fausto Medeiros</au><au>Cenci, Maximiliano Sérgio</au><au>Raggio, Daniela Prócida</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Do the clinical practice guidelines for paediatric dentistry meet the quality standards? A meta‐research and quality appraisal using the AGREE II tool</atitle><jtitle>International journal of paediatric dentistry</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Paediatr Dent</addtitle><date>2024-07</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>360</spage><epage>371</epage><pages>360-371</pages><issn>0960-7439</issn><issn>1365-263X</issn><eissn>1365-263X</eissn><abstract>Background
Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) enhance health care and aid clinicians' decisions.
Aim
To evaluate the quality of clinical guidelines in paediatric dentistry using the AGREE II tool.
Design
PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, LIVIVO, Lilacs, international guidelines websites, scientific societies, and gray literature were searched until September 2021. We included paediatric dental clinical guidelines and excluded drafts or guidelines for patients with special needs. Two independent reviewers performed quality assessment using the APPRAISAL OF GUIDELINES FOR RESEARCH & EVALUATION II (AGREE II) instrument. We calculated the mean overall domain scores (95% confidence interval) for each guideline. We used regression analysis to correlate the score of overall assessment and the six domains of AGREE II with guideline characteristics.
Results
Forty‐four guidelines were included in this study. Highest mean score was for Domain 4 (Clarity of Presentation; 58%, 95% CI: 50.8–64.9), whereas the lowest was for Domain 5 (Applicability; 16%, 95% CI: 10.8–21.4). The reporting quality was improved in Domains 1–5 with reporting checklists (p < .001), whereas that of Domain 6 was improved by decreasing years since publication (p = .047).
Conclusion
Paediatric dental guidelines do not comply with the methodological quality standard, especially in Domain 5 (Applicability). The AGREE reporting checklist should be implemented with a system to evaluate the certainty of evidence for future guidelines.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>37984836</pmid><doi>10.1111/ipd.13133</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7238-4598</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1711-4103</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0794-1578</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0960-7439 |
| ispartof | International journal of paediatric dentistry, 2024-07, Vol.34 (4), p.360-371 |
| issn | 0960-7439 1365-263X 1365-263X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2892271250 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | AGREE II tool Check lists Checklist Child Clinical medicine Clinical practice guidelines Dentistry Humans meta‐research paediatric dentistry Pediatric Dentistry - standards Pediatrics Practice Guidelines as Topic quality appraisal Quality control Regression analysis |
| title | Do the clinical practice guidelines for paediatric dentistry meet the quality standards? A meta‐research and quality appraisal using the AGREE II tool |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T00%3A37%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Do%20the%20clinical%20practice%20guidelines%20for%20paediatric%20dentistry%20meet%20the%20quality%20standards?%20A%20meta%E2%80%90research%20and%20quality%20appraisal%20using%20the%20AGREE%20II%20tool&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20paediatric%20dentistry&rft.au=Elagami,%20Rokaia%20Ahmed&rft.date=2024-07&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=360&rft.epage=371&rft.pages=360-371&rft.issn=0960-7439&rft.eissn=1365-263X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/ipd.13133&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2892271250%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3065139555&rft_id=info:pmid/37984836&rfr_iscdi=true |