Characteristics of Participants for Developing Emergency Health Systems Guidance Based on AGREE-HS
10.13422/j.cnki.syfjx.20250294
- VernacularTitle:基于AGREE-HS评价的应急卫生系统指南参与人员特点
- Author:
An LI
1
;
Gezhi ZHANG
1
;
Xue CHEN
1
;
Fangqi LIU
2
;
Danping ZHENG
1
;
Weixuan BAI
1
;
Wei YANG
1
;
Dongfeng WEI
1
;
Nannan SHI
1
;
Mengyu LIU
1
Author Information
1. Institute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine，China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences，Beijing 100700，China
2. School of Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine，Gansu University of Chinese Medicine，Lanzhou 730000，China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
emergency health systems guidance;
Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation for Health Systems （AGREE-HS）;
assessment;
participants
- From:
Chinese Journal of Experimental Traditional Medical Formulae
2024;30(22):157-163
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
The formulation method of emergency health systems guidance （HSG） is crucial， directly impacting the efficiency and effectiveness of responses in emergencies. A scientifically sound， systematic， and easily executable guidance document can assist health institutions at all levels in quickly coordinating resources， standardizing emergency response processes， and safeguarding public health. This study employed the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation for Health Systems （AGREE-HS） to analyze the characteristics of participants in developing emergency HSGs represented by the COVID-19 emergency HSG. The results showed that in the 34 HSGs included in this study， the item participants received the lowest score. Within this item， criterion 1 （diversity of development group） scored the highest （3.13±1.55）， while criterion 5 （prevention of funding agency influence） scored the lowest （1.21±0.47）. There were differences （P<0.05） in measures taken to mitigate funding agency influence between the six standard HSGs developed by the World Health Organization （WHO） and the four emergency HSGs. Additionally， differences （P<0.05） existed in the development group members， background， conflicts of interest， and preventive measures between the six WHO standard HSGs and the 34 emergency HSGs， as well as between the HSGs developed by the WHO and those developed by countries. The participants in developing emergency HSGs were influenced by various factors， including limited time for guideline development， modes of participation， scarce evidence， and uncertainties in expected outcomes. There is a need to downplay extensive requirements concerning the composition of group members， institutional diversity， and conflicts of interest， emphasizing the roles of key participants like government officials and professionals who can provide rapid， practical guidance in emergency situations.
