Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II

BMC Research Notes

Tomonori Hasegawa¹  Kanako Seto¹  Shimpei Hanaoka¹  Kunichika Matsumoto¹  Shigeru Fujita¹  Takefumi Kitazawa¹ 

[1] Department of Social Medicine, School of Medicine, Toho University;

关键词: Clinical practice guidelines;    AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation) instrument;    Data transfer;    Data mapping;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13104-017-3041-7

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

Abstract Objective The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) is a representative, quantitative evaluation tool for evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Recently, AGREE was revised (AGREE II). The continuity of evaluation data obtained from the original version (AGREE I) has not yet been demonstrated. The present study investigated the relationship between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II to evaluate the continuity between the two measurement tools. Results An evaluation team consisting of three trained librarians evaluated 68 CPGs issued in 2011–2012 in Japan using AGREE I and AGREE II. The correlation coefficients for the six domains were: (1) scope and purpose 0.758; (2) stakeholder involvement 0.708; (3) rigor of development 0.982; (4) clarity of presentation 0.702; (5) applicability 0.919; and (6) editorial independence 0.971. The item “Overall Guideline Assessment” was newly introduced in AGREE II. This global item had a correlation coefficient of 0.628 using the six AGREE I domains, and 0.685 using the 23 items. Our results suggest that data obtained from AGREE I can be transferred to AGREE II, and the “Overall Guideline Assessment” data can be determined with high reliability using a standardized score of the 23 items.

【 授权许可】

Unknown