RT Journal Article
T1 Quality and reporting of clinical guidelines for breast cancer treatment: A systematic review
A1 Maes-Carballo, Marta
A1 Mignini, Luciano
A1 Martín-Díaz, Manuel
A1 Bueno-Cavanillas, Aurora
A1 Khan, Khalid Saeed
K1 Breast cancer
K1 Treatment
K1 Clinical practice guidelines
K1 Guidelines
K1 Consensus
K1 AGREE II
K1 RIGHT
K1 Appraisal instruments
K1 Quality of guidelines
K1 Neoplasias de la mama
K1 Terapéutica
K1 Guía de práctica clínica
K1 Guías como asunto
K1 Consenso
K1 Revisión sistemática
AB Background: High-quality, well-reported clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs) underpinned by systematic reviews are needed. We appraised the quality and reporting of CPGs and CSs for breast cancer (BC) treatment.Methods: Following protocol registration (Prospero no: CRD42020164801), CPGs and CSs on BC treatment were identified, without language restrictions, through a systematic search of bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, CDSR) and online sources (12 guideline databases and 51 professional society websites) from January 2017 to June 2020. Data were extracted in duplicate assessing overall quality using AGREE II (% of maximum score) and reporting compliance using RIGHT (% of total 35 items); reviewer agreement was 98% and 96% respectively.Results: There were 59 relevant guidance documents (43 CPGs, 16 CSs), of which 20 used systematic reviews for evidence synthesis. The median overall quality was 54.0% (IQR 35.9-74.3) and the median overall reporting compliance was 60.9% (IQR 44.5-84.4). The correlation between quality and reporting was 0.9. Compared to CSs, CPGs had better quality (55.4% vs 44.2%; p = 0.032) and reporting (67.18% vs 44.5%; p = 0.005). Compared to subjective methods of evidence analysis, guidance documents that used systematic reviews had better quality (76.3% vs 51.4%; p = 0.001) and reporting (87.1% vs 59.4%; p = 0.001).Conclusion: The quality and reporting of CPGs and CSs in BC treatment were moderately strong. Systematic reviews should be used to improve the quality and reporting of CPGs and CSs.
PB Elsevier
SN 1532-3080
YR 2020
FD 2020-08-10
LK http://hdl.handle.net/10668/3772
UL http://hdl.handle.net/10668/3772
LA en
NO Maes-Carballo M, Mignini L, Martín-Díaz M, Bueno-Cavanillas A, Khan KS. Quality and reprting of clinical guidelines for breast cancer treatment: A systematic review. Breast. 2020 Oct;53:201-211
DS RISalud
RD Apr 5, 2025