Characteristics and quality of clinical practice guidelines for depression in adults: A scoping review 11 Medical and Health Sciences 1117 Public Health and Health Services

Jessica Hanae Zafra-Tanaka, Sergio Goicochea-Lugo, David Villarreal-Zegarra, Alvaro Taype-Rondan

Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a una revistaReseña científicaInvestigaciónrevisión exhaustiva

Resumen

© 2019 The Author(s). Background: Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) should follow an adequate methodology using an evidence-based approach in order to provide reliable recommendations. However, little is known regarding the quality of CPGs for Depression, which precludes its adequate use by stakeholders and mental health professionals. Thus, the aim of this study was to conduct a scoping review to describe the characteristics and quality of CPGs for Depression in adults. Methods: We searched CPGs for Depression in adults in eighteen databases. We included those that were published in English or Spanish between January 2014 and May 2018 and were based on systematic reviews of the evidence. Two independent authors extracted the characteristics, type and number of recommendations, and quality (using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II [AGREE-II]) of each included CPG. Results: We included eleven CPGs, of which 9/11 did not include the participation of patients in the development of the CPG, 4/11 CPGs had a score ≥ 70% in the overall evaluation of AGREE-II, and 3/11 CPGs had a score ≥ 70% in its third domain (rigor of development). In addition, only 5/11 CPGs shared their search strategy, while only 4/11 listed the selected studies they used to reach recommendations, and 7/11 CPGs did not clearly state which methodology they used to translate evidence into a recommendation. Conclusions: Most of evaluated CPGs did not take into account the patient's viewpoints, achieved a low score in the rigor of development domain, and did not clearly state the process used to reach the recommendations. Stakeholders, CPCGs developers, and CPGs users should take this into account when choosing CPGs, and interpreting and putting into practice their issued recommendations.
Idioma originalInglés estadounidense
PublicaciónBMC Psychiatry
DOI
EstadoPublicada - 20 feb 2019

Huella dactilar

Public health
Practice Guidelines
Health Services
Public Health
Health
Depression
Guidelines
Patient Participation
Mental Health

Citar esto

@article{7c1a6284a76645709241c60a281d7383,
title = "Characteristics and quality of clinical practice guidelines for depression in adults: A scoping review 11 Medical and Health Sciences 1117 Public Health and Health Services",
abstract = "{\circledC} 2019 The Author(s). Background: Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) should follow an adequate methodology using an evidence-based approach in order to provide reliable recommendations. However, little is known regarding the quality of CPGs for Depression, which precludes its adequate use by stakeholders and mental health professionals. Thus, the aim of this study was to conduct a scoping review to describe the characteristics and quality of CPGs for Depression in adults. Methods: We searched CPGs for Depression in adults in eighteen databases. We included those that were published in English or Spanish between January 2014 and May 2018 and were based on systematic reviews of the evidence. Two independent authors extracted the characteristics, type and number of recommendations, and quality (using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II [AGREE-II]) of each included CPG. Results: We included eleven CPGs, of which 9/11 did not include the participation of patients in the development of the CPG, 4/11 CPGs had a score ≥ 70{\%} in the overall evaluation of AGREE-II, and 3/11 CPGs had a score ≥ 70{\%} in its third domain (rigor of development). In addition, only 5/11 CPGs shared their search strategy, while only 4/11 listed the selected studies they used to reach recommendations, and 7/11 CPGs did not clearly state which methodology they used to translate evidence into a recommendation. Conclusions: Most of evaluated CPGs did not take into account the patient's viewpoints, achieved a low score in the rigor of development domain, and did not clearly state the process used to reach the recommendations. Stakeholders, CPCGs developers, and CPGs users should take this into account when choosing CPGs, and interpreting and putting into practice their issued recommendations.",
author = "Zafra-Tanaka, {Jessica Hanae} and Sergio Goicochea-Lugo and David Villarreal-Zegarra and Alvaro Taype-Rondan",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "20",
doi = "10.1186/s12888-019-2057-z",
language = "American English",
journal = "BMC Psychiatry",
issn = "1471-244X",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",

}

Characteristics and quality of clinical practice guidelines for depression in adults: A scoping review 11 Medical and Health Sciences 1117 Public Health and Health Services. / Zafra-Tanaka, Jessica Hanae; Goicochea-Lugo, Sergio; Villarreal-Zegarra, David; Taype-Rondan, Alvaro.

En: BMC Psychiatry, 20.02.2019.

Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a una revistaReseña científicaInvestigaciónrevisión exhaustiva

TY - JOUR

T1 - Characteristics and quality of clinical practice guidelines for depression in adults: A scoping review 11 Medical and Health Sciences 1117 Public Health and Health Services

AU - Zafra-Tanaka, Jessica Hanae

AU - Goicochea-Lugo, Sergio

AU - Villarreal-Zegarra, David

AU - Taype-Rondan, Alvaro

PY - 2019/2/20

Y1 - 2019/2/20

N2 - © 2019 The Author(s). Background: Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) should follow an adequate methodology using an evidence-based approach in order to provide reliable recommendations. However, little is known regarding the quality of CPGs for Depression, which precludes its adequate use by stakeholders and mental health professionals. Thus, the aim of this study was to conduct a scoping review to describe the characteristics and quality of CPGs for Depression in adults. Methods: We searched CPGs for Depression in adults in eighteen databases. We included those that were published in English or Spanish between January 2014 and May 2018 and were based on systematic reviews of the evidence. Two independent authors extracted the characteristics, type and number of recommendations, and quality (using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II [AGREE-II]) of each included CPG. Results: We included eleven CPGs, of which 9/11 did not include the participation of patients in the development of the CPG, 4/11 CPGs had a score ≥ 70% in the overall evaluation of AGREE-II, and 3/11 CPGs had a score ≥ 70% in its third domain (rigor of development). In addition, only 5/11 CPGs shared their search strategy, while only 4/11 listed the selected studies they used to reach recommendations, and 7/11 CPGs did not clearly state which methodology they used to translate evidence into a recommendation. Conclusions: Most of evaluated CPGs did not take into account the patient's viewpoints, achieved a low score in the rigor of development domain, and did not clearly state the process used to reach the recommendations. Stakeholders, CPCGs developers, and CPGs users should take this into account when choosing CPGs, and interpreting and putting into practice their issued recommendations.

AB - © 2019 The Author(s). Background: Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) should follow an adequate methodology using an evidence-based approach in order to provide reliable recommendations. However, little is known regarding the quality of CPGs for Depression, which precludes its adequate use by stakeholders and mental health professionals. Thus, the aim of this study was to conduct a scoping review to describe the characteristics and quality of CPGs for Depression in adults. Methods: We searched CPGs for Depression in adults in eighteen databases. We included those that were published in English or Spanish between January 2014 and May 2018 and were based on systematic reviews of the evidence. Two independent authors extracted the characteristics, type and number of recommendations, and quality (using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II [AGREE-II]) of each included CPG. Results: We included eleven CPGs, of which 9/11 did not include the participation of patients in the development of the CPG, 4/11 CPGs had a score ≥ 70% in the overall evaluation of AGREE-II, and 3/11 CPGs had a score ≥ 70% in its third domain (rigor of development). In addition, only 5/11 CPGs shared their search strategy, while only 4/11 listed the selected studies they used to reach recommendations, and 7/11 CPGs did not clearly state which methodology they used to translate evidence into a recommendation. Conclusions: Most of evaluated CPGs did not take into account the patient's viewpoints, achieved a low score in the rigor of development domain, and did not clearly state the process used to reach the recommendations. Stakeholders, CPCGs developers, and CPGs users should take this into account when choosing CPGs, and interpreting and putting into practice their issued recommendations.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85061989708&origin=inward

UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85061989708&origin=inward

U2 - 10.1186/s12888-019-2057-z

DO - 10.1186/s12888-019-2057-z

M3 - Scientific review

JO - BMC Psychiatry

JF - BMC Psychiatry

SN - 1471-244X

ER -