Interventional radiology clinical practice guideline recommendations for neurovascular disorders are not based on high-quality systematic reviews

American Journal of Neuroradiology

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 759-765

  Chong, A B ^a   Taylor, M ^a   Schubert, G ^a   Vassar, M ^a  

^a OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COCHRANE LIBRARY; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; HUMAN; INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); NEUROLOGIC DISEASE; PROCEDURES; VASCULAR DISEASE;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; NERVOUS SYSTEM DISEASES; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RADIOLOGY, INTERVENTIONAL; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; VASCULAR DISEASES;

EID: 85017633665     PISSN: 01956108     EISSN: 1936959X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5079     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Graham R, Mancher M, Miller Wolman D, et al, eds; Institute of Medicine Committee on Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice G. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington DC: National Academies Press; 2011
2. Brott TG, Halperin JL, Abbara S, et al. 2011 ASA/ACCF/AHA/AANN/ AANS/ACR/ASNR/CNS/SAIP/SCAI/SIR/SNIS/SVM/SVS guideline on the management of patients with extracranial carotid and vertebral artery disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American Stroke Association, American Association of Neuroscience Nurses, American Association of Neurological Surgeons, American College of Radiology, American Society of Neuroradiology, Congress of Neurological Surgeons, Society of Atherosclerosis Imaging and Prevention, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Interventional Radiology, Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery, Society for Vascular Medicine, and Society for Vascular Surgery. J AmColl Cardiol 2011; 57:e16-94 CrossRef Medline
3. Paraskevas KI, Mikhailidis DP, Veith FJ. Comparison of the five 2011 guidelines for the treatment of carotid stenosis. J Vasc Surg 2012;55: 1504-08 CrossRef Medline
4. Lavis JN. How can we support the use of systematic reviews in policymaking? PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000141 CrossRef Medline
5. Yuan Y, Hunt RH. Systematic reviews: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104:1086-92 CrossRef Medline
6. Brito JP, Tsapas A, Griebeler ML, et al. Systematic reviews supporting practice guideline recommendations lack protection against bias. J Clin Epidemiol 2013;66:633-38 CrossRef Medline
7. Bennett K, Gorman DA, Duda S, et al. Practitioner review: on the trustworthiness of clinical practice guidelines-a systematic review of the quality of methods used to develop guidelines in child and youth mental health. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2016;57:662-73 CrossRef Medline
8. Burda BU, Norris SL, Holmer HK, et al. Quality varies across clinical practice guidelines for mammography screening in women aged 40-49 years as assessed by AGREE and AMSTAR instruments. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:968-76 CrossRef Medline
9. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097 CrossRef Medline
10. Bryce S, Sloan E, Lee S, et al. Cognitive remediation in schizophrenia: a methodological appraisal of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. J Psychiatr Res 2016;75:91-106 CrossRef Medline
11. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007;7:10 CrossRef Medline
12. Shea BJ, Hamel C, Wells GA, et al. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;62:1013-20 CrossRef Medline
13. Pieper D, Buechter RB, Li L, et al. Systematic review found AMSTAR, but not R(evised)-AMSTAR, to have good measurement properties. J Clin Epidemiol 2015;68:574-83 CrossRef Medline
14. Sharif MO, Janjua-Sharif FN, Ali H, et al. Systematic reviews explained:AMSTAR-howto tell the good from the bad and the ugly. Oral Health Dent Manage 2013;12:9-16 Medline
15. Office for Human Research Protections. §46.102 Definitions. Revised January 15, 2009. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/45-cfr-46/#46.102. Accessed July 7, 2016
16. Lang TA, Altman DG. Basic statistical reporting for articles published in biomedical journals: the "Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature" or theSAMPLguidelines. Int J Nurs Stud 2015;52:5-9 CrossRef Medline
17. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;62:e1-34 CrossRef Medline
18. Burda BU, Holmer HK, Norris SL. Limitations of A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) and suggestions for improvement. Syst Rev 2016;5:58 CrossRef Medline
19. Popovich I, Windsor B, Jordan V, et al. Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of two different approaches. PLoS One 2012;7:e50403 CrossRef Medline
20. Wojak JC, Abruzzo TA, Bello JA, et al. Quality Improvement Guidelines for Adult Diagnostic Cervicocerebral Angiography: update cooperative study between the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR), American Society of Neuroradiology (ASNR), and Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery (SNIS). J Vasc Interv Radiol 2015;26: 1596-608 CrossRef Medline
21. Bates ER, Babb JD, Casey DE Jr, et al; American College of Cardiology Foundation, American Society of Interventional & Therapeutic Neuroradiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society for Vascular Medicine and Biology, Society of Interventional Radiology. ACCF/SCAI/SVMB/SIR/ASITN 2007 clinical expert consensus document on carotid stenting: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents (ACCF/SCAI/SVMB/SIR/ASITN Clinical Expert ConsensusDocumentCommitteeonCarotid Stenting). J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:126-70 CrossRef Medline
22. Kowalczuk M, Adamich J, Simunovic N, et al. Methodological quality of systematic reviews addressing femoroacetabular impingement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2015;23:2583-89 CrossRef Medline
23. Corbyons K, Han J, Neuberger MM, et al. Methodological quality of systematic reviews published in the urological literature from 1998 to 2012. J Urol 2015;194:1374-79 CrossRef Medline
24. Ho RS,WuX, Yuan J, et al. Methodological quality of meta-analyses on treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a crosssectional study using the AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) tool. NPJ Prim Care Respir Med 2015; 25:14102 CrossRef Medline
25. Nicolau I, Ling D, Tian L, et al. Methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews on tuberculosis. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2013; 17:1160-09 CrossRef Medline
26. Delaney J, Laws P, Wille-Jorgensen P, et al. Inflammatory bowel disease meta-evidence and its challenges: is it time to restructure surgical research? Colorectal Dis 2015;17:600-11 CrossRef Medline
27. Arevalo-Rodriguez I, Segura O, Solà I, et al. Diagnostic tools for Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias: an overview of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) systematic reviews.BMCNeurol 2014; 14:183 CrossRef Medline
28. Macedo CR, Riera R, Torloni MR. Methodological quality of systematic reviews and clinical trials on women's health published in a Brazilian evidence-based health journal. Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) 2013;68:563-67 CrossRef Medline
29. Papageorgiou SN, Papadopoulos MA, Athanasiou AE. Evaluation of methodology and quality characteristics of systematic reviews in orthodontics. Orthod Craniofac Res 2011;14:116-37 CrossRef Medline
30. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines, 3: rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:401-06 CrossRef Medline
31. Makarski J, BrouwersMC;AGREEEnterprise.TheAGREEEnterprise: a decade of advancing clinical practice guidelines. Implement Sci 2014;9: 103 CrossRef Medline
32. Whiting P, Savović J, Higgins JP, et al. ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol 2016;69:225-34 CrossRef Medline
33. Clark E, Donovan EF, Schoettker P. From outdated to updated, keeping clinical guidelines valid. Int J Qual Health Care 2006;18: 165-66 CrossRef Medline
34. Brook OR, Beddy P, Pahade J, et al. Delayed growth in incidental pancreatic cysts: are the current American College of Radiology recommendations for follow-up appropriate? Radiology 2016;278: 752-61 CrossRef Medline
35. Shekelle PG, Ortiz E, Rhodes S, et al. Validity of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality clinical practice guidelines: how quickly do guidelines become outdated? JAMA 2001;286:1461-67 CrossRef Medline
36. Alonso-Coello P, Martínez Garcia L, Carrasco JM, et al. The updating of clinical practice guidelines: insights from an international survey. Implement Sci 2011;6:107 CrossRef Medline
37. Sacks D, Black CM, Cognard C, et al; American Society of Neuroradiology, Canadian Interventional Radiology Association, Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Interventional Radiology, Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery, European Society of Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy, Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology. Multisociety consensus quality improvement guidelines for intraarterial catheter-directed treatment of acute ischemic stroke, from the American Society of Neuroradiology, Canadian Interventional Radiology Association, Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Interventional Radiology, Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery, European Society of Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy, and Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2013;24:151-63 CrossRef Medline