Quality appraisal of documents producing recommendations for breast, colorectal and cervical cancer screening

作者: Laura Camilloni , Eliana Ferroni , Piero Borgia , Marica Ferri , Alessandra Barca

DOI: 10.2427/9062

关键词: Conflict of interestPsychological interventionFamily medicineCancer screeningGynecologyStakeholderHealth careContext (language use)CLARITYQuality (business)Medicine

摘要: Background: Breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening are evidence-based interventions recommended by most governmental agencies scientific societies. The aim of this review is to assess the quality guidelines on describe differences according context in which they were produced. Methods: A literature search main databases, websites health care, guidelines, as well several societies was carried out order identify recent (since 2000) breast, screening. Only documents written Italian or English included. Two investigators independently assessed using AGREE (Appraisal Guidelines, Research Evaluation Europe) instrument. Results: Thirty-three, 32, 18 relevant for cancer, respectively, identified. some (19, 12 13 respectively) could be evaluated with AGREE. Items included domain “scope purpose” obtained highest scores, followed “clarity presentation” domain, while “applicability”, “patient involvement,” “conflict interest disclosure” domains lowest scores. did not improve more documents. Documents produced agencies, average, had higher scores than societies, particularly “stakeholder involvement” “applicability”. Conclusions : from different countries systems differ terms recommendations given Those have a multidisciplinary authorship pay attention applicability do those  societies.

参考文章(57)
Luke B Connelly, Ian Frazer, NHMRC Guidelines Review Group, Screening to prevent cervical cancer: Guidelines for the management of asymptomatic women with screen detected abnormalities Commonwealth of Australia. ,(2005)
Trevor A. Sheldon, Gert-Jan van der Wilt, Torben Jorgensen, Frederick Fleurette, Bengt Brorssen, Gabriel ten Velden, Harri Sintonen, James P. Kahan, Alessandro Liberati, Henry David Banta, Albert Jovell, EUR-ASSESS Project Subgroup Report on Methodology Cambridge University Press. ,(1997)
Consumer Protection, E. Puthaar, N. Perry, European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis Amendoeira, I; et al (2013). European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Belgium: European Commission.. pp. 1- 160 ,(2013) , 10.5167/UZH-84270
Peter C Gøtzsche, Karsten Juhl Jørgensen, Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. ,vol. 2013, ,(2013) , 10.1002/14651858.CD001877.PUB5
Xavier Bonfill Cosp, Mercè Marzo Castillejo, Manel Pladevall Vila, Joan Marti, José I Emparanza, Strategies for increasing the participation of women in community breast cancer screening Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. ,vol. 2001, ,(2001) , 10.1002/14651858.CD002943
T. N. Walsh, N. O'Higgins, Breast cancer management: clinical guidelines. Royal College of Sugeons in Ireland. ,(2000)
Joy C MacDermid, Dina Brooks, Sherra Solway, Sharon Switzer-McIntyre, Lucie Brosseau, Ian D Graham, Reliability and validity of the AGREE instrument used by physical therapists in assessment of clinical practice guidelines BMC Health Services Research. ,vol. 5, pp. 18- 18 ,(2005) , 10.1186/1472-6963-5-18
Thomas Everett, Andrew Bryant, Michelle F Griffin, Pierre PL Martin-Hirsch, Carol A Forbes, Ruth G Jepson, Interventions targeted at women to encourage the uptake of cervical screening Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. ,vol. 2011, ,(2011) , 10.1002/14651858.CD002834.PUB2
Douglas K. Rex, David A. Johnson, Joseph C. Anderson, Phillip S. Schoenfeld, Carol A. Burke, John M. Inadomi, American College of Gastroenterology Guidelines for Colorectal Cancer Screening 2008 The American Journal of Gastroenterology. ,vol. 104, pp. 739- 750 ,(2009) , 10.1038/AJG.2009.104