A Guideline for Guidelines: A Novel Method to Assess the Helpfulness of Medical Guidelines

Author:

Koller Akos1234ORCID,Takács Johanna5ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Physiology, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY 10595, USA

2. Department of Morphology and Physiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Semmelweis University, H-1088 Budapest, Hungary

3. Department of Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, HUN-REN-SE Cerebrovascular and Neurocognitive Disease Research Group, Semmelweis University, H-1094 Budapest, Hungary

4. Research Center for Sports Physiology, Hungarian University of Sports Science, H-1123 Budapest, Hungary

5. Department of Social Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, Semmelweis University, H-1088 Budapest, Hungary

Abstract

Background/Objectives: The recommendations included in medical guidelines (GLs) provide important help to medical professionals for making clinical decisions regarding the diagnosis and treatment of various diseases. However, there are no systematic methods to measure the helpfulness of GLs. Thus, we developed an objective assessment of GLs which indicates their helpfulness and quality. We hypothesized that a simple mathematical analysis of ‘Recommendations’ and ‘Evidence’ would suffice. Methods: As a proof of concept, a mathematical analysis was conducted on the ‘2020 European Society of Cardiology Guidelines on Sports Cardiology and Exercise in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease Guideline’ (SCE-guideline). First, the frequencies of Classes of Recommendations (CLASS) and the Levels of Evidence (LEVEL) (n = 159) were analysed. Then, LEVEL areas under CLASS were calculated to form a certainty index (CI: −1 to +1). Results: The frequency of CLASS I (‘to do’) and CLASS III (‘not to do’) was relatively high in the SCE-guideline (52.2%). Yet, the most frequent LEVEL was C (41.2–83.8%), indicating only a relatively low quality of scientific evidence in the SCE-guideline. The SCE-guideline showed a relatively high CI (+0.57): 78.4% certainty and 21.6% uncertainty. Conclusions: The SCE-guideline provides substantial help in decision making through the recommendations (CLASS), while the supporting evidence (LEVEL) in most cases is of lower quality. This is what the newly introduced certainty index showed: a tool for ‘quality control’ which can identify specific areas within GLs, and can promote the future improvement of GLs. The newly developed mathematical analysis can be used as a Guideline for the Guidelines, facilitating the assessment and comparison of the helpfulness and quality of GLs.

Funder

Ministry for Innovation and Technology Hungary, National Research, Development and Innovation Fund

Hungarian Academy of Sciences

Publisher

MDPI AG

Reference38 articles.

1. Health care practices in ancient Greece: The Hippocratic ideal;Kleisiaris;J. Med. Ethics Hist. Med.,2014

2. Field, M.J., and Lohr, K.N. (1992). Guidelines for Clinical Practice: From Development to Use, National Academies Press.

3. Dixon, T. (2019). Chapter 12—Clinical Guidelines for Decision-Making. Pharmacy Education, Practice and Research, Elsevier.

4. Parfrey, P.S., and Barrett, B.J. (2021). Evidence-Based Decision Making 4: Clinical Practice Guidelines. Clinical Epidemiology. Methods in Molecular Biology, Humana.

5. Development and Validation of a Tool to Assess the Quality of Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations;Brouwers;JAMA Netw. Open,2020

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3