Quality assessment of clinical guidelines for the treatment of obesity in adults: application of the AGREE II instrument

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Reis,Erika Cardoso dos
Data de Publicação: 2018
Outros Autores: Passos,Sonia Regina Lambert, Santos,Maria Angelica Borges dos
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Cadernos de Saúde Pública
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-311X2018000605010
Resumo: There are various guidelines for the treatment of obesity, and thus the quality of these clinical guidelines has become a matter of concern. The objective was to describe and assess the quality of clinical guidelines for treatment of obesity in adults. We collected several studies, dated from 1998 to 2016, produced by different countries. The literature search included the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC), Guidelines International Network (GIN), PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, Web of Science, webpages of health institutions from different countries, and search sites, with the criterion: “clinical guidelines for treatment of obesity in adults and published until the 2016”. The guidelines were assessed with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE II), according to the domains of the instrument. The search identified 21 guidelines: nine from Europe, six from North America, three from Latin America, and one each from Asia and Oceania and a transnational association. The Australian guideline had the best assessment. Of the six guidelines with the highest scores, five had been elaborated by the government sector responsible for the country’s health. The domains “scope and purpose” and “clarity of presentation” had the highest score. Except for the Canadian guideline, the three guidelines drafted before the elaboration of AGREE II had the worst quality. In the domain “stakeholder involvement”, only four guidelines (Australia, Scotland, France, and England) mentioned patient participation. Guideline development and quality enhancement are ongoing processes requiring systematic appraisal of the guideline production process and existing guidelines.
id FIOCRUZ-5_162f91ec9bcc233b58071e96e4d9f5e3
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0102-311X2018000605010
network_acronym_str FIOCRUZ-5
network_name_str Cadernos de Saúde Pública
repository_id_str
spelling Quality assessment of clinical guidelines for the treatment of obesity in adults: application of the AGREE II instrumentObesityPractice Guidelines as TopicHealth Technology AssessmentThere are various guidelines for the treatment of obesity, and thus the quality of these clinical guidelines has become a matter of concern. The objective was to describe and assess the quality of clinical guidelines for treatment of obesity in adults. We collected several studies, dated from 1998 to 2016, produced by different countries. The literature search included the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC), Guidelines International Network (GIN), PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, Web of Science, webpages of health institutions from different countries, and search sites, with the criterion: “clinical guidelines for treatment of obesity in adults and published until the 2016”. The guidelines were assessed with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE II), according to the domains of the instrument. The search identified 21 guidelines: nine from Europe, six from North America, three from Latin America, and one each from Asia and Oceania and a transnational association. The Australian guideline had the best assessment. Of the six guidelines with the highest scores, five had been elaborated by the government sector responsible for the country’s health. The domains “scope and purpose” and “clarity of presentation” had the highest score. Except for the Canadian guideline, the three guidelines drafted before the elaboration of AGREE II had the worst quality. In the domain “stakeholder involvement”, only four guidelines (Australia, Scotland, France, and England) mentioned patient participation. Guideline development and quality enhancement are ongoing processes requiring systematic appraisal of the guideline production process and existing guidelines.Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública Sergio Arouca, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz2018-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-311X2018000605010Cadernos de Saúde Pública v.34 n.6 2018reponame:Cadernos de Saúde Públicainstname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)instacron:FIOCRUZ10.1590/0102-311x00050517info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessReis,Erika Cardoso dosPassos,Sonia Regina LambertSantos,Maria Angelica Borges doseng2018-06-20T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0102-311X2018000605010Revistahttp://cadernos.ensp.fiocruz.br/csp/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpcadernos@ensp.fiocruz.br||cadernos@ensp.fiocruz.br1678-44640102-311Xopendoar:2018-06-20T00:00Cadernos de Saúde Pública - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Quality assessment of clinical guidelines for the treatment of obesity in adults: application of the AGREE II instrument
title Quality assessment of clinical guidelines for the treatment of obesity in adults: application of the AGREE II instrument
spellingShingle Quality assessment of clinical guidelines for the treatment of obesity in adults: application of the AGREE II instrument
Reis,Erika Cardoso dos
Obesity
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Health Technology Assessment
title_short Quality assessment of clinical guidelines for the treatment of obesity in adults: application of the AGREE II instrument
title_full Quality assessment of clinical guidelines for the treatment of obesity in adults: application of the AGREE II instrument
title_fullStr Quality assessment of clinical guidelines for the treatment of obesity in adults: application of the AGREE II instrument
title_full_unstemmed Quality assessment of clinical guidelines for the treatment of obesity in adults: application of the AGREE II instrument
title_sort Quality assessment of clinical guidelines for the treatment of obesity in adults: application of the AGREE II instrument
author Reis,Erika Cardoso dos
author_facet Reis,Erika Cardoso dos
Passos,Sonia Regina Lambert
Santos,Maria Angelica Borges dos
author_role author
author2 Passos,Sonia Regina Lambert
Santos,Maria Angelica Borges dos
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Reis,Erika Cardoso dos
Passos,Sonia Regina Lambert
Santos,Maria Angelica Borges dos
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Obesity
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Health Technology Assessment
topic Obesity
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Health Technology Assessment
description There are various guidelines for the treatment of obesity, and thus the quality of these clinical guidelines has become a matter of concern. The objective was to describe and assess the quality of clinical guidelines for treatment of obesity in adults. We collected several studies, dated from 1998 to 2016, produced by different countries. The literature search included the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC), Guidelines International Network (GIN), PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, Web of Science, webpages of health institutions from different countries, and search sites, with the criterion: “clinical guidelines for treatment of obesity in adults and published until the 2016”. The guidelines were assessed with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE II), according to the domains of the instrument. The search identified 21 guidelines: nine from Europe, six from North America, three from Latin America, and one each from Asia and Oceania and a transnational association. The Australian guideline had the best assessment. Of the six guidelines with the highest scores, five had been elaborated by the government sector responsible for the country’s health. The domains “scope and purpose” and “clarity of presentation” had the highest score. Except for the Canadian guideline, the three guidelines drafted before the elaboration of AGREE II had the worst quality. In the domain “stakeholder involvement”, only four guidelines (Australia, Scotland, France, and England) mentioned patient participation. Guideline development and quality enhancement are ongoing processes requiring systematic appraisal of the guideline production process and existing guidelines.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-311X2018000605010
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-311X2018000605010
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/0102-311x00050517
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública Sergio Arouca, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública Sergio Arouca, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Cadernos de Saúde Pública v.34 n.6 2018
reponame:Cadernos de Saúde Pública
instname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
instacron:FIOCRUZ
instname_str Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
instacron_str FIOCRUZ
institution FIOCRUZ
reponame_str Cadernos de Saúde Pública
collection Cadernos de Saúde Pública
repository.name.fl_str_mv Cadernos de Saúde Pública - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv cadernos@ensp.fiocruz.br||cadernos@ensp.fiocruz.br
_version_ 1754115738890665984