Table 3

Mean scores for the 23 items and overall standardized scores for each domain from the 13 guidelines evaluated assessed with AGREE.

Domain

Item

Mean score (range)


1 (Scope and purpose)

• The overall objective(s) of the guideline is (are) specifically described

3.7 (2.3 to 4.0)

• The clinical question(s) covered by the guideline is(are) specifically described

3.6 (2.7 to 4.0)

• The patients to whom the guideline is meant to apply are specifically described

3.7 (3.3 to 4.0)

Overall standardized score, %

89.5 (66.7 to 100.0)


2 (Stakeholder involvement)

• The guideline development group includes individuals from all the relevant professional groups

3.3 (1.3 to 4.0)

• The patients' views and preferences have been sought

2.7 (1.3 to 4.0)

• The target users of the guideline are clearly defined

3.0 (1.0 to 4.0)

• The guideline has been piloted among end users

1.1 (1.0 to 1.7)

Overall standardized score, %)

50.9 (8.3 to 75.0)


3 (Rigour of development)

• Systematic methods were used to search for evidence

2.6 (1.0 to 4.0)

• The criteria for selecting the evidence are clearly described

2.8 (1.0 to 4.0)

• The methods used for formulating the recommendations are clearly described

3.0 (1.0 to 4.0)

• The health benefits, side effects, and risks have been considered in formulating the recommendations

3.1 (1.7 to 4.0)

• There is an explicit link between the recommendations and the supporting evidence

3.1 (1.3 to 4.0)

• The guideline has been externally reviewed by experts before its publication

2.3 (1.0 to 4.0)

• A procedure for updating the guideline is provided

1.7 (1.0 to 4.0)

Overall standardized score, %

55.5 (7.9 to 96.8)


4 (Clarity and presentation)

• The recommendations are specific and unambiguous

3.4 (2.3 to 4.0)

• The different options for management of the condition are clearly presented

3.4 (2.3 to 4.0)

• Key recommendations are easily identifiable

3.7 (2.7 to 4.0)

• The guideline is supported with tools for application

3.0 (1.0 to 4.0)

Overall standardized score, %

79.7 (55.6 to 100.0)


5 (Applicability)

• The potential organizational barriers in applying the recommendations have been discussed

2.2 (1.0 to 4.0)

• The potential cost implications of applying the recommendations have been considered

2.4 (1.0 to 4.0)

• The guideline presents key review criteria for monitoring and/or audit purposes

1.7 (1.0 to 3.7)

• Overall standardized score, %

37.0 (0.0 to 88.9)


6 (Editorial independence)

• The guideline is editorially independent from the funding body

2.2 (1.0 to 4.0)

• Conflicts of interest of guideline development members have been recorded

2.6 (1.0 to 4.0)

Overall standardized score, %

47.4 (0.0 to 100.0)


Simone et al. BMC Medicine 2012 10:143   doi:10.1186/1741-7015-10-143

Open Data