• 1. Department of Nephrology, the Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P.R.China;
  • 2. The Second Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P.R.China;
ZENG Rong, Email: zengrong05@126.com
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Objective  To assess the methodological quality of clinical guidelines and consensus of lupus nephritis, to collect the recommendations of each guideline, and to provide references for clinical decision-making. Methods  PubMed, CNKI, and CBM databases and related websites such as NGC, NICE, GIN, SIGN, and Medive were electronically searched from January 2012 to December 2020 to collect the clinical guidelines and expert consensus for lupus nephritis. After consistency evaluation by four evaluators, the methodological quality of the included guidelines or expert consensus was evaluated using AGREE Ⅱ. The relevant recommendations, evidence level, and recommended strength of each guideline in treating lupus nephritis were summarized. Results  A total of eight guidelines and two consensus statements were included. Among them, eight guidelines or consensus statements were level B (generally recommended guidelines), and two were level C (non-recommended guidelines). Relevant recommendations mainly gave the corresponding treatment scheme according to the pathological type of lupus nephritis. Conclusion  The methodological quality of lupus nephritis guideline formulation in China needs to be improved. The included guidelines and consensus can provide reference for clinical decision-makers. However, higher-quality clinical practice guidelines for the Chinese population are needed to be developed in the future.

Citation: ZENG Rong, LI Ruizhe, FU Yiwen, HAN Wanruo, FENG Xiaowen. Methodological quality assessment of clinical guidelines and consensus for lupus nephritis. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2022, 22(1): 103-110. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.202108144 Copy

  • Previous Article

    Yearly-end thanks and prospects
  • Next Article

    Development and validation for evaluation of an evaluation tool for guideline implementation