Skip to main content

Table 2 Item scores

From: Updated clinical guidelines experience major reporting limitations

  Updated CGs reporting each item n (%)
Presentation of the updated clinical guideline
 Item 1: The updated version can be distinguished from the previous version of the clinical guideline. 60 (100)
 Item 2: The rationale for updating the clinical guideline is reported. 37 (61.7)
 Item 3: Changes in the scope and purpose between the update and the previous version are described and justified. 34 (56.7)
 Item 4: The sections reviewed in the updating process are described. 40 (66.7)
 Item 5: Recommendations are clearly presented and labelled as new, modified, or not changed. Deleted recommendations are clearly noted. 16 (26.7)
 Item 6: Changes in recommendations are reported and justified. 23 (38.3)
Editorial independence
 Item 7: The panel participants in the updated version are described. 57 (95.0)
 Item 8: Disclosures of interest of the group responsible for the updated version are recorded. 58 (96.7)
 Item 9: The role of the funding body for the updated version is identified and described. 30 (50.0)
Methodology of the updating process
 Item 10: The methods used for searching and identifying new evidence in the updating process are described. 49 (81.7)
 Item 11: The methods used for evidence selection in the updating process are described. 47 (78.3)
 Item 12: The methods used to assess the quality of the included evidence in the updating process are described. 46 (76.7)
 Item 13: The methods used for evidence synthesis in the updating process are described. 28 (46.7)
 Item 14: The methods used for external review of the updated version are described. 23 (38.3)
 Item 15: The methods and plan for implementing the changes of the updated version in practice are described. 23 (38.3)
 Item 16: The plan and methods for updating the new version in the future are reported. 24 (40.0)
  1. One guideline is rated as not applicable