• 1. Henan University of Chinese Medicine, Zhengzhou 450000, P. R. China;
  • 2. The First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of TCM, Zhengzhou 450008, P. R. China;
XU Liran, Email: xuliran666@sina.com
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Objective  To evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of clinical guidelines and consensus for adult AIDS. Methods  Databases including PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI were electronically searched and major guideline websites such as GIN, NICE, NGC and Yimaitong were also searched to collect guidelines and consensus for adult AIDS from inception to December 2021. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted data according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Four reviewers evaluated the methodological and reporting quality of the included guidelines and consensus by using AGREE Ⅱ and RIGHT, respectively. Results  A total of 17 adult AIDS guidelines and consensus were included. The average scores of AGREE Ⅱ in various domains were 59.48% for scope and purpose, 37.17% for stakeholder involvement, 30.76% for rigor of development, 74.75% for clarity of presentation, 35.54% for applicability, and 50.49% for editorial independence. The items with the highest reporting rate among the RIGHT evaluation items were 1a, 1b and 1c (100.00%), followed by 3 and 4 (94.12%), 13a and 13b (88.24%), 7b and 11a (76.47%), and 5 (64.71%), and the remaining items were all reported below 60%. Results of subgroup analysis showed that the clarity of presentation, applicability and editorial independence of the guidelines for adult AIDS expressed in AGREE Ⅱ and the average score of RIGHT were higher than those of the consensuses for adult AIDS; the average scores of guidelines and consensuses based on evidence-based medicine in five domains of AGREE Ⅱ (scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation and applicability) and RIGHT were higher than those based on expert opinions or reviews. The foreign guidelines and consensus had higher average scores in the six domains of AGREE Ⅱ and the RIGHT score than the domestic guidelines. Conclusion  The methodological quality and reporting quality of the published clinical guidelines and consensuses for adult AIDS is low; in particular, there is a certain gap between the national and international guidelines and consensuses. It is suggested that future guideline developers should refer to international standards, such as AGREE Ⅱ and RIGHT, formulate high-quality guidelines and promote their application to better regulate the diagnosis and treatment of adult AIDS.

Citation: SHA Yinyin, XU Liran, MA Xiuxia, MENG Pengfei, SHAO Cancan, WANG Xueting, JIA Yandan. Quality evaluation of clinical guidelines and consensus for adult AIDS. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2022, 22(6): 706-715. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.202202085 Copy

  • Previous Article

    A survey of studies investigating the association between medication exposure during pregnancy and birth defects
  • Next Article

    Meta-epidemiology: origin and development