临床实践指南适用性及质量评价工具特征研究OA

Objective To systematically review clinical practice guidelines(CPGs)appraisal tools for applicability and quality worldwide,and to summarize their characteristics and current status to support standardized application and the development of clinical evaluation indicators.Methods PubMed,Cochrane Library,Embase,Web of Science,CNKI,Wanfang Data,VIP,CBM,and four CPGs databases were searched for tools published between January 1,2004 and August 20,2024.Studies were screened and data were extracted by two reviewers independently.Data were analyzed using frequencies and proportions.Results A total of 24 CPGs tools(2005-2023)were included,comprising 13(54.17％)applicability tools and 11(45.83％)quality tools.Applicability tools mainly focused on availability and readability,while quality tools emphasized scope and purpose and stakeholder involvement.Eleven tools(45.83％)were developed in China,and 19(79.17％)were journal publications,with 4-77 items.Fourteen(58.33％)reported no conflicts of interest.Most tools evaluated CPGs(19,79.17％),followed by Chinese medicine CPGs(3,12.50％)and Chinese national CPGs(2,8.33％).The target users of the tools include three categories,with guideline users being the most common target audience(17,70.83％),and 11(45.83％)tools used quantitative scoring.The development team members involved nine disciplines and specialties,with methodologists being the most common at 7 items(29.17％).Conclusions Although the number of appraisal tools is increasing,limitations remain,including unclear scoring criteria,limited user perspectives,overlapping items,and insufficient reflection of Chinese medicine characteristics.Further improvement is needed.