» Articles » PMID: 29288133

Systematic Review of Current Guideline Appraisals Performed with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II Instrument-a Third of AGREE II Users Apply a Cut-off for Guideline Quality

Overview
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Public Health
Date 2017 Dec 31
PMID 29288133
Citations 43
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To investigate whether Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II users apply a cut-off based on standardized domain scores or overall guideline quality to distinguish between high- and low-quality guidelines, as well as to investigate which criteria they use to generate this cut-off and which type of cut-off they apply.

Study Design And Setting: We conducted a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, DARE, and the HTA-database for German- and English-language studies appraising guidelines with AGREE II. Information on cut-offs was extracted and analyzed descriptively.

Results: We identified 118 relevant publications. Thirty-nine (33%) used a cut-off, of which 24 (62%) used a 2-step and 13 (33%) used a 3-step approach. The cut-off for high quality lay between 50% and 70% (2-step) and 60% and 83% (3-step) of the highest possible rating. Twenty-four (62%) publications applied a cut-off based on standardized domain scores and 7 (18%) based on overall guideline quality. Eleven (28%) applied cut-offs to derive the recommendation for guideline use.

Conclusion: A third of AGREE II users apply a cut-off to distinguish between high- and low-quality guidelines, often without clearly describing how the cut-off is generated. Many users might welcome a clear distinction between high- and low-quality guidelines; specifying a cut-off for this purpose might be useful.

Citing Articles

Quality assessment of clinical guidelines in the care of laryngitis and pharyngitis according to AGREE II.

Carvalho L, Barbosa A, Laismann N, Barros D, Lima R, Santana R Codas. 2025; 37(1):e20240016.

PMID: 39879424 PMC: 11781360. DOI: 10.1590/2317-1782/e20240016en.


A systematic review of the clinical practice guidelines for the assessment, management and treatment of eating disorders during the perinatal period.

Ecob C, Smith D, Tsivos Z, Hossain N, Peters S BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025; 25(1):82.

PMID: 39871196 PMC: 11773850. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-024-06995-x.


Recommendations for guidelines for promoting mental health in the workplace: an umbrella review.

Pinhatti E, Nascimento A, Machado R, Pimenta R, Jaques A, Haddad M Rev Bras Enferm. 2024; 77(6):e20240086.

PMID: 39699366 PMC: 11654520. DOI: 10.1590/0034-7167-2024-0086.


Quality in aesthetic medicine and surgery: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines.

Maes-Carballo M, Estrada-Lopez C, Martinez-Martinez C, Alberca-Remigio C, Camara-Martinez C, Josa-Martinez B Colomb Med (Cali). 2024; 55(2):e2016257.

PMID: 39669436 PMC: 11637547. DOI: 10.25100/cm.v55i2.6257.


Worldwide Research Trends and Regional Differences in the Development of Precision Medicine Under Data-Driven Approach: A Bibliometric Analysis.

Niu H, Li K, Yu T, Zhang M, Ji Z, Yu P J Multidiscip Healthc. 2024; 17:5259-5275.

PMID: 39563835 PMC: 11575460. DOI: 10.2147/JMDH.S482543.