AGREE II: Advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care

CMAJ. Canadian Medical Association Journal

Volumn 182, Issue 18, 2010, Pages

  Brouwers, Melissa C ^a,b   Kho, Michelle E ^a   Browman, George P ^c   Burgers, Jako S ^d   Cluzeau, Francoise ^e   Feder, Gene ^f   Fervers, Béatrice ^g   Graham, Ian D ^h   Grimshaw, Jeremy ⁱ   Hanna, Steven E ^a   Littlejohns, Peter ^j   Makarski, Julie ^a   Zitzelsberger, Louise ^k  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b CANCER CARE ONTARIO   (Canada)

^c BRITISH COLUMBIA CANCER AGENCY   (Canada)

^d RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^e ST GEORGE'S UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^g UNIVERSITÉ LYON 1   (France)

^h CANADIAN INSTITUTES OF HEALTH RESEARCH   (Canada)

ⁱ OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^j NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CARE EXCELLENCE   (United Kingdom)

^k Canadian Partnership Against Cancer   (Canada)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; DECISION MAKING; DOCUMENTATION; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREDICTION; PSYCHOMETRY; RATING SCALE; RELIABILITY; SCORING SYSTEM;

EID: 77954608997     PISSN: 08203946     EISSN: 14882329     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.090449     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Committee to Advise the Public Health Service on Clinical Practice Guidelines, Institute of Medicine. In: Field MJ, Lohr KN, editors. Clinical practice guidelines: directions for a new program. Washington (DC): National Academy Press; 1990.
2. Browman GP, Brouwers M, Fervers B, et al. Population-based cancer control and the role of guidelines-towards a "systems" approach. In: Elwood JM, Sutcliffe SB, editors. Cancer control. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press; 2010.
3. Shaneyfelt TM, Mayo-Smith MF, Rothwangl J. Are guidelines following guidelines? The methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines in the peer-reviewed medical literature [see comments]. JAMA 1999;281:1900-5.
4. Vigna-Taglianti F, Vineis P, Liberati A, et al. Quality of systematic reviews used in guidelines for oncology practice. Ann Oncol 2006;17:691-701.
5. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 3rd ed. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press; 2003.
6. Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, et al.; AGREE Next Steps Consortium. Development of the AGREE II, part 1: performance, usefulness and areas for improvement. CMAJ 2010 May 31. [Epub ahead of print].
7. Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, et al.; AGREE Next Steps Consortium. Development of the AGREE II, part 2: assessment of validity of items and tools to support application. CMAJ 2010 May 31. [Epub ahead of print].
8. AGREE Collaboration. Development and validation of an international appraisal instrument for assessing the quality of clinical practice guidelines: the AGREE project. Qual Saf Health Care 2003;12:18-23.
9. Nuckols TK, Lim YW, Wynn BO, et al. Rigorous development does not ensure that guidelines are acceptable to a panel of knowledgeable providers. J Gen Intern Med 2008;23:37-44.
10. Watine J, Friedberg B, Nagy E, et al. Conflict between guideline methodologic quality and recommendation validity: a potential problem for practitioners. Clin Chem 2006;52:65-72.
11. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman D. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA 2001;285:1987-91.
12. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ 2007;335:806-8.