To the Editor:Transparency is acknowledged to be crucial for the improvement of interdisciplinary research quality and reproducibility.The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors(ICMJE)has introduced requir...To the Editor:Transparency is acknowledged to be crucial for the improvement of interdisciplinary research quality and reproducibility.The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors(ICMJE)has introduced requirements for prospective registration,reporting of results and data sharing to make trial registration in public databases a standard practice.[1,2]Transparency of systematic reviews can also be evaluated from prospective registration of schemes and/or publicly available protocols.However,no framework exists for the evaluation of the transparency of clinical practice guidelines(CPGs)and definitions of guideline transparency remain unclear.展开更多
Background:This study aimed to develop a comprehensive instrument for evaluating and ranking clinical practice guidelines,named Scientific,Transparent and Applicable Rankings tool(STAR),and test its reliability,validi...Background:This study aimed to develop a comprehensive instrument for evaluating and ranking clinical practice guidelines,named Scientific,Transparent and Applicable Rankings tool(STAR),and test its reliability,validity,and usability.Methods:This study set up a multidisciplinary working group including guideline methodologists,statisticians,journal editors,clinicians,and other experts.Scoping review,Delphi methods,and hierarchical analysis were used to develop the STAR tool.We evaluated the instrument’s intrinsic and interrater reliability,content and criterion validity,and usability.Results:STAR contained 39 items grouped into 11 domains.The mean intrinsic reliability of the domains,indicated by Cronbach’sαcoefficient,was 0.588(95%confidence interval[CI]:0.414,0.762).Interrater reliability as assessed with Cohen’s kappa coefficient was 0.774(95%CI:0.740,0.807)for methodological evaluators and 0.618(95%CI:0.587,0.648)for clinical evaluators.The overall content validity index was 0.905.Pearson’s r correlation for criterion validity was 0.885(95%CI:0.804,0.932).The mean usability score of the items was 4.6 and the median time spent to evaluate each guideline was 20 min.Conclusion:The instrument performed well in terms of reliability,validity,and efficiency,and can be used for comprehensively evaluating and ranking guidelines.展开更多
Transparency Ecosystem for Research and Journals in Medicine(TERM)working group summarized the essential recommendations that should be considered to review and publish a high-quality guideline.These recommendations f...Transparency Ecosystem for Research and Journals in Medicine(TERM)working group summarized the essential recommendations that should be considered to review and publish a high-quality guideline.These recommendations from editors and reviewers included 10 components of essential requirements:systematic review of existing relevant guidelines,guideline registration,guideline protocol,stakeholders,conflicts of interest,clinical questions,systematic reviews,recommendation consensus,guideline reporting and external review.TERM working group abbreviates them as PAGE(essential requirements for Publishing clinical prActice GuidelinEs),and recommends guideline authors,editors,and peer reviewers to use them for high-quality guidelines.展开更多
Transparency Ecosystemfor Research and Journals inMedicine(TERM)Working Group summarized the essential recommendations that should be considered to review and publish a high-quality guideline.These recommendations fro...Transparency Ecosystemfor Research and Journals inMedicine(TERM)Working Group summarized the essential recommendations that should be considered to review and publish a high-quality guideline.These recommendations fromeditors and reviewers included the 10 components of essential requirements:systematic review of existing relevant guidelines,guideline registration,guideline protocol,stakeholders,conflicts of interest,clinical questions,systematic reviews,recommendation consensus,guideline reporting,and external review.TERMWorking Group abbreviates them as PAGE(essential requirements for Publishing clinical prActice GuidelinEs),recommends guideline authors,editors,and peer reviewers use them for high-quality guidelines.展开更多
High-quality traditional Chinese medicine(TCM)guidelines can standardize the clinical practices of relevant health care profes-sionals,enhance medical quality,reduce health care costs,and promote the standardization o...High-quality traditional Chinese medicine(TCM)guidelines can standardize the clinical practices of relevant health care profes-sionals,enhance medical quality,reduce health care costs,and promote the standardization of TCM.This article provides a summary and analysis of the status and quality of guidelines in the TCM.In addition,it briefly introduces the reporting standards for 3 types of TCM guidelines,aiming to serve as a reference for those involved in the development and reporting of TCM guidelines.展开更多
基金This study was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China(Nos.72074161 and 81873197)the Project of Medical Management Center of National Health Commission,China(No.ZX2022020).
文摘To the Editor:Transparency is acknowledged to be crucial for the improvement of interdisciplinary research quality and reproducibility.The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors(ICMJE)has introduced requirements for prospective registration,reporting of results and data sharing to make trial registration in public databases a standard practice.[1,2]Transparency of systematic reviews can also be evaluated from prospective registration of schemes and/or publicly available protocols.However,no framework exists for the evaluation of the transparency of clinical practice guidelines(CPGs)and definitions of guideline transparency remain unclear.
基金funded by China Scholarship Council(Grant No.202206180007)funded by China Scholarship Council(Grant No.202206180006).
文摘Background:This study aimed to develop a comprehensive instrument for evaluating and ranking clinical practice guidelines,named Scientific,Transparent and Applicable Rankings tool(STAR),and test its reliability,validity,and usability.Methods:This study set up a multidisciplinary working group including guideline methodologists,statisticians,journal editors,clinicians,and other experts.Scoping review,Delphi methods,and hierarchical analysis were used to develop the STAR tool.We evaluated the instrument’s intrinsic and interrater reliability,content and criterion validity,and usability.Results:STAR contained 39 items grouped into 11 domains.The mean intrinsic reliability of the domains,indicated by Cronbach’sαcoefficient,was 0.588(95%confidence interval[CI]:0.414,0.762).Interrater reliability as assessed with Cohen’s kappa coefficient was 0.774(95%CI:0.740,0.807)for methodological evaluators and 0.618(95%CI:0.587,0.648)for clinical evaluators.The overall content validity index was 0.905.Pearson’s r correlation for criterion validity was 0.885(95%CI:0.804,0.932).The mean usability score of the items was 4.6 and the median time spent to evaluate each guideline was 20 min.Conclusion:The instrument performed well in terms of reliability,validity,and efficiency,and can be used for comprehensively evaluating and ranking guidelines.
基金supported by the Foundation of Chinese Medical Association Publishing House.
文摘Transparency Ecosystem for Research and Journals in Medicine(TERM)working group summarized the essential recommendations that should be considered to review and publish a high-quality guideline.These recommendations from editors and reviewers included 10 components of essential requirements:systematic review of existing relevant guidelines,guideline registration,guideline protocol,stakeholders,conflicts of interest,clinical questions,systematic reviews,recommendation consensus,guideline reporting and external review.TERM working group abbreviates them as PAGE(essential requirements for Publishing clinical prActice GuidelinEs),and recommends guideline authors,editors,and peer reviewers to use them for high-quality guidelines.
基金supported by the Foundation of Chinese Medical Association Publishing House.
文摘Transparency Ecosystemfor Research and Journals inMedicine(TERM)Working Group summarized the essential recommendations that should be considered to review and publish a high-quality guideline.These recommendations fromeditors and reviewers included the 10 components of essential requirements:systematic review of existing relevant guidelines,guideline registration,guideline protocol,stakeholders,conflicts of interest,clinical questions,systematic reviews,recommendation consensus,guideline reporting,and external review.TERMWorking Group abbreviates them as PAGE(essential requirements for Publishing clinical prActice GuidelinEs),recommends guideline authors,editors,and peer reviewers use them for high-quality guidelines.
文摘High-quality traditional Chinese medicine(TCM)guidelines can standardize the clinical practices of relevant health care profes-sionals,enhance medical quality,reduce health care costs,and promote the standardization of TCM.This article provides a summary and analysis of the status and quality of guidelines in the TCM.In addition,it briefly introduces the reporting standards for 3 types of TCM guidelines,aiming to serve as a reference for those involved in the development and reporting of TCM guidelines.
