Exportar registro bibliográfico


Metrics:

Methodological quality and transparency of clinical practice guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of non-communicable diseases using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review protocol (2017)

  • Authors:
  • Autor USP: RIBEIRO, ELIANE - FCF
  • Unidade: FCF
  • DOI: 10.1186/s13643-017-0621-5
  • Subjects: DOENÇA CRÔNICA; PROTOCOLOS CLÍNICOS
  • Language: Inglês
  • Imprenta:
  • Source:
  • Acesso à fonteDOI
    Informações sobre o DOI: 10.1186/s13643-017-0621-5 (Fonte: oaDOI API)
    • Este periódico é de acesso aberto
    • Este artigo é de acesso aberto
    • URL de acesso aberto
    • Cor do Acesso Aberto: gold
    • Licença: cc-by

    How to cite
    A citação é gerada automaticamente e pode não estar totalmente de acordo com as normas

    • ABNT

      MOLINO, Caroline de Godoi Rezende Costa; RIBEIRO, Eliane; ROMANO-LIEBER, Nicolina Silvana; STEIN, Airton Tetelbom; MELO, Daniela Oliveira de. Methodological quality and transparency of clinical practice guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of non-communicable diseases using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review protocol. Systematic Reviews, London, v. 6, n. 1, p. 1-6 art. 220, 2017. Disponível em: < http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0621-5 > DOI: 10.1186/s13643-017-0621-5.
    • APA

      Molino, C. de G. R. C., Ribeiro, E., Romano-Lieber, N. S., Stein, A. T., & Melo, D. O. de. (2017). Methodological quality and transparency of clinical practice guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of non-communicable diseases using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review protocol. Systematic Reviews, 6( 1), 1-6 art. 220. doi:10.1186/s13643-017-0621-5
    • NLM

      Molino C de GRC, Ribeiro E, Romano-Lieber NS, Stein AT, Melo DO de. Methodological quality and transparency of clinical practice guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of non-communicable diseases using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review protocol [Internet]. Systematic Reviews. 2017 ; 6( 1): 1-6 art. 220.Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0621-5
    • Vancouver

      Molino C de GRC, Ribeiro E, Romano-Lieber NS, Stein AT, Melo DO de. Methodological quality and transparency of clinical practice guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of non-communicable diseases using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review protocol [Internet]. Systematic Reviews. 2017 ; 6( 1): 1-6 art. 220.Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0621-5

    Referências citadas na obra
    Mayor S. Non-communicable diseases now cause two thirds of deaths worldwide. BMJ. 2016;355:i5456.
    Smith R. Global response to non-communicable disease. BMJ. 2011;342:d3823.
    World Health Organization (WHO). Noncommunicable diseases [Internet]. WHO Mediacentre—Fact sheets. 2015 [cited 10 Feb 2017]. Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs355/en/
    Ornstein SM, Nietert PJ, Jenkins RG, Litvin CB. The prevalence of chronic diseases and multimorbidity in primary care practice: a PPRNet report. J Am Board Fam Med. 2013;26:518–24.
    Roberts KC, Rao DP, Bennett TL, Loukine L, Jayaraman GC. Prevalence and patterns of chronic disease multimorbidity and associated determinants in Canada. Heal Promot Chronic Dis Prev Canada. 2015;35:87–94.
    Jaspers L, Colpani V, Chaker L, van der Lee SJ, Muka T, Imo D, et al. The global impact of non-communicable diseases on households and impoverishment: a systematic review. Eur J Epidemiol 2014;30:163–188.
    Jaeschke R, Guyatt GH, Dellinger P, Schünemann H, Levy MM, Kunz R, et al. Use of GRADE grid to reach decisions on clinical practice guidelines when consensus is elusive. BMJ. 2008;337:a744.
    Molino CDGRC, Romano-Lieber NS, Ribeiro E, de Melo DO. Non-communicable disease clinical practice guidelines in Brazil: a systematic assessment of methodological quality and transparency. PLoS One 2016;11:e0166367.
    Alonso-Coello P, Irfan A, Solà I, Gich I, Delgado-Noguera M, Rigau D, et al. The quality of clinical practice guidelines over the last two decades: a systematic review of guideline appraisal studies. Qual Saf Heal Care. 2010;19:e58.
    Knai C, Brusamento S, Legido-Quigley H, Saliba V, Panteli D, Turk E, et al. Systematic review of the methodological quality of clinical guideline development for the management of chronic disease in Europe. Health Policy (New York). 2012;107:157–67.
    Chen Y, Hu S, Wu L, Fang X, Xu W, Shen G. Clinical practice guidelines for hypertension in China: a systematic review of the methodological quality. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e008099.
    Gagliardi AR, Brouwers MC. Do guidelines offer implementation advice to target users? A systematic review of guideline applicability BMJ Open. 2015;5:e007047.
    Siering U, Eikermann M, Hausner E, Hoffmann-Eßer W, Neugebauer EA. Appraisal tools for clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2013;8:e82915.
    Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, et al. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. CMAJ. 2010;182:E839–42.
    Semlitsch T, Blank WA, Kopp IB, Siering U, Siebenhofer A. Evaluating guidelines: a review of key quality criteria. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015;112:471–8.
    Legido-Quigley H, Panteli D, Brusamento S, Knai C, Saliba V, Turk E, et al. Clinical guidelines in the European Union: mapping the regulatory basis, development, quality control, implementation and evaluation across member states. Health Policy. 2012;107:146–56.
    Kung J, Miller RR, Mackowiak PA. Failure of clinical practice guidelines to meet Institute of Medicine Standards: two more decades of little, if any. Progress Arch Intern Med. 2012;172:1.
    Shaneyfelt T, Mayo-Smith M, Rothwangl J. Are guidelines following guidelines? The methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines in the peer-reviewed medical literature. JAMA. 1999;281:1900–5.
    Grilli R, Magrini N, Penna A, Mura G, Liberati A. Practice guidelines developed by specialty societies: the need for a critical appraisal. Lancet. 2000;355:103–6.
    Kryworuchko J, Stacey D, Bai N, Graham ID. Twelve years of clinical practice guideline development, dissemination and evaluation in Canada (1994 to 2005). Implement Sci. 2009;4:49.
    Molino C, Melo D, Romano-Lieber N, Ribeiro E. Non-communicable disease practice guidelines : a systematic assessment of methodological quality and transparency. PROSPERO [Internet]. 2016;CRD42016043364. Available from: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42016043364
    Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4:1.
    Lefèvre T, D’Ivernois J-F, De Andrade V, Crozet C, Lombrail P, Gagnayre R. What do we mean by multimorbidity? An analysis of the literature on multimorbidity measures, associated factors, and impact on health services organization. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 2014;62:305–314.
    Lorgunpai SJ, Grammas M, Lee DSH, McAvay G, Charpentier P, Tinetti ME. Potential therapeutic competition in community-living older adults in the U.S.: use of medications that may adversely affect a coexisting condition. PLoS One. 2014;9:e89447.
    Barnett K, Mercer SW, Norbury M, Watt G, Wyke S, Guthrie B. Epidemiology of multimorbidity and implications for health care, research, and medical education: a cross-sectional study. Lancet. 2012;380:37–43.
    Menotti A, Mulder I, Nissinen A, Giampaoli S, Feskens EJM, Kromhout D. Prevalence of morbidity and multimorbidity in elderly male populations and their impact on 10-year all-cause mortality: the FINE study (Finland, Italy, Netherlands, elderly). J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:680–6.
    GRADE Working group [Internet]. [cited 5 Feb 2017 ]. Available from: http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/
    OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group. The Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence [Internet]. [cited 2017 Feb 5]. Available from: http://www.cebm.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/CEBM-Levels-of-Evidence-2.1.pdf
    Khan GSCC, Stein AT. Adaptação transcultural do instrumento Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) para avaliação de diretrizes clínicas. Cad Saude Publica. 2014;30:1111–4.
    AGREE Next Steps Consortium (2009). The AGREE II Instrument [Electronic version] [Internet]. Available from: http://www.agreetrust.org
    Ronsoni RDM, CC de A P, Stein AT, Osanai MH, Machado CJ. Avaliação de oito Protocolos Clínicos e Diretrizes Terapêuticas (PCDT) do Ministério da Saúde por meio do instrumento AGREE II: um estudo piloto. Cad Saude Publica. 2015;31:1157–62.

Digital Library of Intellectual Production of Universidade de São Paulo     2012 - 2020