SP9.8 - Assessing the quality of guidelines for the management of Gastro-Intestinal Stromal Tumour
Rattachement africain : gb. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Introduction Gastro Intestinal Stromal Tumours (GISTs) are tumours of the gastro-intestinal tract that arise from connective tissue and they have potential for malignancy. A number of guidelines exist in their management. The aim of this study is to assess the quality of these guidelines. Methods A search of the literature was undertaken for appropriate guidelines pertaining to the diagnosis and management of GISTs. The AGREE II checklist was used to assess the current GIST guidelines. Results A total of nine guidelines were included in this study. The overall median score across all guidelines was 68% (lowest; 50%, highest 89%). Guidelines tended to score highly in Domain IV (Clarity of Presentation, median score 76%) as well as Domain VI (Editorial Independence, 67%) and Domain I (Scope and Purpose, 61%). However, lower scores were noted in the Domain V (Applicability, 39%), Domain III (Rigor of Development, 52%) and Domain II (Stakeholder Involvement, 56%). None of the guidelines scored a unanimous ‘Yes’ vote for clinical usage, and all needed some level of modifying. Conclusion Whilst some of the current guidelines for the management of GISTs is of a high quality, there is a need for improvement with regards to the quality of the methodology used to formulate the guidelines and how they can be implemented in daily clinical use.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- SP9.8 - Assessing the quality of guidelines for the management of Gastro-Intestinal Stromal Tumour
- Date Crossref
- 01/09/2024
- Éditeur
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.