Time trend analysis reveals areas for improvement in quality of clinical practice guidelines in Japan.
Previous studies evaluating the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II tool mainly focus on domain scores. The current study analyses item-level AGREE II scores over time to identify trends in CPG quality and key areas for improvement. We included all Japanese CPGs developed using evidence-based medicine (EBM) methods and published between 2011 and 2022. Each CPG was evaluated by three independent appraisers using the AGREE II, with item scores ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Time trends in item scores were analysed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficients. The items were grouped based on their 2011 scores and whether improving trends were observed. A total of 604 CPGs were evaluated, with the mean item score in 2011 of 4.96. No item had both a high score and an improving trend. A total of 13 items had high scores but no improving trend, while six low-scoring items exhibited improvement. A total of four items (5, 9, 14, 21) had low scores and no improving trend, with items 14 and 21 displaying worsening trends. Items 14 (Updating Procedure) and 21 (Monitoring/Auditing Criteria) were identified as key areas requiring improvement. Addressing post-publication efforts and disseminating best practices may improve the overall CPG quality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hatakeyama et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: