Background/objectives The growing interest of medical community about sarcopenia resulted in the production of several clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), with an unavoidable variability in terms of the overall quality of those publications. Our aim is to evaluate the quality of CPGs on sarcopenia using the AGREE II instrument. Subjects/methods We performed an online literature search for sarcopenia CPGs using different databases. Four independent reviewers evaluated the quality of CPGs using the AGREE II instrument. To classify the quality of each guideline, we defined specific thresholds of final score: high-quality if five or more domains scored >60%; average-quality if three or four domains scored >60%; low-quality if <= 2 domains scored >60%. Results Our literature search yielded 315 articles, and after applying exclusion criteria our final analysis included 19 CPGs. The overall quality of CPGs was remarkable, as 13/19 (68.4%) were considered of "high-quality" CPGs, with more than four domains reached a score higher than 60%. "Scope and Purpose" and "Clarity of Presentations" had the best domain results (78.4% and 73.8%, respectively), while the two domains with the lowest scores were "Rigor of Development" and "Applicability" (61.5% and 58.7%, respectively). Interobserver variability ranged between moderate (0.624) and fair (0.275). Conclusions Our study showed that the overall quality of CPGs about sarcopenia was noteworthy, as more than two-third of paper obtained a "high-quality" score. The domain "applicability" had the lowest score, suggesting that emphasis should be put on possible strategies for helping other doctors to implement guideline recommendations in clinical practice.
Critical appraisal of papers reporting recommendation on sarcopenia using the AGREE II tool : a EuroAIM initiative / C. Messina, J.A. Vitale, L. Pedone, V. Chianca, I. Vicentin, D. Albano, S. Gitto, L.M. Sconfienza. - In: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION. - ISSN 0954-3007. - 74:8(2020 Aug), pp. 1164-1172. [10.1038/s41430-020-0638-z]
Critical appraisal of papers reporting recommendation on sarcopenia using the AGREE II tool : a EuroAIM initiative
C. Messina
Primo
;J.A. VitaleSecondo
;I. Vicentin;D. Albano;S. GittoPenultimo
;L.M. SconfienzaUltimo
2020
Abstract
Background/objectives The growing interest of medical community about sarcopenia resulted in the production of several clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), with an unavoidable variability in terms of the overall quality of those publications. Our aim is to evaluate the quality of CPGs on sarcopenia using the AGREE II instrument. Subjects/methods We performed an online literature search for sarcopenia CPGs using different databases. Four independent reviewers evaluated the quality of CPGs using the AGREE II instrument. To classify the quality of each guideline, we defined specific thresholds of final score: high-quality if five or more domains scored >60%; average-quality if three or four domains scored >60%; low-quality if <= 2 domains scored >60%. Results Our literature search yielded 315 articles, and after applying exclusion criteria our final analysis included 19 CPGs. The overall quality of CPGs was remarkable, as 13/19 (68.4%) were considered of "high-quality" CPGs, with more than four domains reached a score higher than 60%. "Scope and Purpose" and "Clarity of Presentations" had the best domain results (78.4% and 73.8%, respectively), while the two domains with the lowest scores were "Rigor of Development" and "Applicability" (61.5% and 58.7%, respectively). Interobserver variability ranged between moderate (0.624) and fair (0.275). Conclusions Our study showed that the overall quality of CPGs about sarcopenia was noteworthy, as more than two-third of paper obtained a "high-quality" score. The domain "applicability" had the lowest score, suggesting that emphasis should be put on possible strategies for helping other doctors to implement guideline recommendations in clinical practice.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
s41430-020-0638-z.pdf
accesso riservato
Tipologia:
Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione
562.51 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
562.51 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
s41430-020-0638-z.pdf
accesso riservato
Tipologia:
Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione
552.2 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
552.2 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.