Discordant and inappropriate discordant recommendations in consensus and evidence based guidelines: empirical analysis

作者
Liang Yao,Muhammad Muneeb Ahmed,Gordon Guyatt,Peijing Yan,Hui Xu,Qi Wang,Kehu Yang,Jinhui Tian,Benjamin Djulbegoviĉ
出处
期刊:BMJ [BMJ]
卷期号:: e066045-e066045 被引量:18
标识
DOI:10.1136/bmj-2021-066045
摘要

To investigate whether alignment of strength of recommendations with quality of evidence differs in consensus based versus evidence based guidelines.Empirical analysis.Guidelines developed by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) up to 27 March 2021.Recommendations were clearly categorised as consensus or evidence based, were separated from the remainder of the text, and included both the quality of evidence and the strength of the recommendations.Paired authors independently extracted the recommendation characteristics, including type of recommendation (consensus or evidence based), grading system used for developing recommendations, strength of the recommendation, and quality of evidence. The study team also calculated the number of discordant recommendations (strong recommendations with low quality evidence) and inappropriate discordant recommendations (those that did not meet grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation criteria of appropriateness).The study included 12 ACC/AHA guidelines that generated 1434 recommendations and 69 ASCO guidelines that generated 1094 recommendations. Of the 504 ACC/AHA recommendations based on low quality evidence, 200 (40%) proved to be consensus based versus 304 (60%) evidence based; of the 404 ASCO recommendations based on low quality evidence, 292 (72%) were consensus based versus 112 (28%) that were evidence based. In both ACC/AHA and ASCO guidelines, the consensus approach yielded more discordant recommendations (ACC/AHA: odds ratio 2.1, 95% confidence interval 1.5 to 3.1; ASCO: 2.9, 1.1 to 7.8) and inappropriate discordant recommendations (ACC/AHA: 2.6, 1.7 to 3.7; ASCO: 5.1, 1.6 to 16.0) than the evidence based approach.Consensus based guidelines produce more recommendations violating the evidence based medicine principles than evidence based guidelines. Ensuring appropriate alignment of quality of evidence with the strength of recommendations is key to the development of "trustworthy" guidelines.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
PDF的下载单位、IP信息已删除 (2025-6-4)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
机灵的冬瓜完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
zb发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
1秒前
科研通AI5应助清爽的乐双采纳,获得10
1秒前
在水一方应助小旋风采纳,获得20
2秒前
2秒前
pxh完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
小铃铛完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
4秒前
情怀应助风玲采纳,获得30
4秒前
DNase发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
4秒前
桐桐应助Oriom采纳,获得10
5秒前
5秒前
tanglu发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
5秒前
景清发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
科目三应助oldblack采纳,获得30
7秒前
小憩完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
伴风望海发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
nkuwangkai完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
adeline925完成签到,获得积分20
8秒前
开心人达发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
9秒前
星辰大海应助络绎采纳,获得10
10秒前
feng发布了新的文献求助30
12秒前
12秒前
踏实的丝完成签到,获得积分20
12秒前
高兴电脑发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
星辰大海应助贺知什么书采纳,获得10
15秒前
按摩头了完成签到,获得积分10
15秒前
万能图书馆应助小叙采纳,获得10
15秒前
iNk应助木耳采纳,获得10
15秒前
SCI完成签到,获得积分10
16秒前
Jasper应助苏黎世采纳,获得10
16秒前
17秒前
17秒前
17秒前
17秒前
18秒前
高分求助中
A new approach to the extrapolation of accelerated life test data 1000
Indomethacinのヒトにおける経皮吸収 400
基于可调谐半导体激光吸收光谱技术泄漏气体检测系统的研究 370
Phylogenetic study of the order Polydesmida (Myriapoda: Diplopoda) 370
Robot-supported joining of reinforcement textiles with one-sided sewing heads 320
Aktuelle Entwicklungen in der linguistischen Forschung 300
Current Perspectives on Generative SLA - Processing, Influence, and Interfaces 300
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 内科学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 复合材料 遗传学 基因 物理化学 催化作用 冶金 细胞生物学 免疫学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 3992518
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 3533486
关于积分的说明 11262567
捐赠科研通 3273054
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1805922
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 882858
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 809496