Efficient clinical evaluation of guideline quality: development and testing of a new tool

被引:51
作者
Grimmer, Karen [1 ]
Dizon, Janine Margarita [1 ,2 ]
Milanese, Steve [1 ]
King, Ellena [1 ]
Beaton, Kate [1 ]
Thorpe, Olivia [1 ]
Lizarondo, Lucylynn [1 ]
Luker, Julie [1 ,3 ]
Machotka, Zuzana [1 ]
Kumar, Saravana [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ S Australia, Int Ctr Allied Hlth Evidence, Sch Hlth Sci, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
[2] Univ Santo Tomas, Coll Rehabil Sci, Manila 1083, Philippines
[3] Univ Melbourne, Florey Inst Neurosci & Mental Hlth, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
来源
BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY | 2014年 / 14卷
关键词
Guideline quality assessment; Psychometric testing; AGREE II instrument; iCAHE guideline quality checklist; RELIABILITY;
D O I
10.1186/1471-2288-14-63
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Evaluating the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines is essential before deciding which ones which could best inform policy or practice. One current method of evaluating clinical guideline quality is the research-focused AGREE II instrument. This uses 23 questions scored 1-7, arranged in six domains, which requires at least two independent testers, and uses a formulaic weighted domain scoring system. Following feedback from time-poor clinicians, policy-makers and managers that this instrument did not suit clinical need, we developed and tested a simpler, shorter, binary scored instrument (the iCAHE Guideline Quality Checklist) designed for single users. Methods: Content and construct validity, inter-tester reliability and clinical utility were tested by comparing the new iCAHE Guideline Quality Checklist with the AGREE II instrument. Firstly the questions and domains in both instruments were compared. Six randomly-selected guidelines on a similar theme were then assessed by three independent testers with different experience in guideline quality assessment, using both instruments. Per guideline, weighted domain and total AGREE II scores were calculated, using the scoring rubric for three testers. Total iCAHE scores were calculated per guideline, per tester. The linear relationship between iCAHE and AGREE II scores was assessed using Pearson r correlation coefficients. Score differences between testers were assessed for the iCAHE Guideline Quality Checklist. Results: There were congruent questions in each instrument in four domains (Scope & Purpose, Stakeholder involvement, Underlying evidence/Rigour, Clarity). The iCAHE and AGREE II scores were moderate to strongly correlated for the six guidelines. There was generally good agreement between testers for iCAHE scores, irrespective of their experience. The iCAHE instrument was preferred by all testers, and took significantly less time to administer than the AGREE II instrument. However, the use of only three testers and six guidelines compromised study power, rendering this research as pilot investigations of the psychometric properties of the iCAHE instrument. Conclusion: The iCAHE Guideline Quality Checklist has promising psychometric properties and clinical utility.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Rescuing A Patient In Deteriorating Situations (RAPIDS): An evaluation tool for assessing simulation performance on clinical deterioration
    Liaw, Sok Ying
    Scherpbier, Albert
    Klainin-Yobas, Piyanee
    Rethans, Jan-Joost
    RESUSCITATION, 2011, 82 (11) : 1434 - 1439
  • [32] Clinical evaluation of a new pressure ulcer risk assessment instrument, the Pressure Ulcer Risk Primary or Secondary Evaluation Tool (PURPOSE T)
    Coleman, Susanne
    Smith, Isabelle L.
    McGinnis, Elizabeth
    Keen, Justin
    Muir, Delia
    Wilson, Lyn
    Stubbs, Nikki
    Dealey, Carol
    Brown, Sarah
    Nelson, E. Andrea
    Nixon, Jane
    JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, 2018, 74 (02) : 407 - 424
  • [33] Development and validation of primary health care quality assessment tool
    Farrokhi, Pouria
    Zarei, Ehsan
    Bagherzadeh, Rafat
    Irannejad, Behrooz
    Hashjin, Asgar Aghaei
    BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2023, 23 (01)
  • [34] The development of a quality appraisal tool for studies of diagnostic reliability (QAREL)
    Lucas, Nicholas P.
    Macaskill, Petra
    Irwig, Les
    Bogduk, Nikolai
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2010, 63 (08) : 854 - 861
  • [35] Development and validation of primary health care quality assessment tool
    Pouria Farrokhi
    Ehsan Zarei
    Rafat Bagherzadeh
    Behrooz Irannejad
    Asgar Aghaei Hashjin
    BMC Health Services Research, 23
  • [36] Development and validation of a quality appraisal tool for validity studies (QAVALS)
    Gore, Shweta
    Goldberg, Allon
    Huang, Min H.
    Shoemaker, Michael
    Blackwood, Jennifer
    PHYSIOTHERAPY THEORY AND PRACTICE, 2021, 37 (05) : 646 - 654
  • [37] The Preschool Physical Literacy Assessment Tool: Testing a New Physical Literacy Tool for the Early Years
    Cairney, John
    Clark, Heather J.
    James, Maeghan E.
    Mitchell, Drew
    Dudley, Dean A.
    Kriellaars, Dean
    FRONTIERS IN PEDIATRICS, 2018, 6
  • [38] Resilience at University: the development and testing of a new measure
    Turner, Michelle
    Holdsworth, Sarah
    Scott-Young, Christina M.
    HIGHER EDUCATION RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT, 2017, 36 (02) : 386 - 400
  • [39] Measuring the quality of Hospital Food Services: Development and reliability of a Meal Quality Audit Tool
    Banks, Merrilyn
    Hannan-Jones, Mary
    Ross, Lynda
    Buckley, Ann
    Ellick, Jennifer
    Young, Adrienne
    NUTRITION & DIETETICS, 2017, 74 (02) : 147 - 157
  • [40] Development, evaluation and validation of a new instrument for measurement quality of life in the parents of children with chronic disease
    Małgorzata Farnik
    Grzegorz Brożek
    Władysław Pierzchała
    Jan E Zejda
    Michał Skrzypek
    Łukasz Walczak
    Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 8