Systematic Review of the Methodology Quality in Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines
10.3779/j.issn.1009-3419.2016.10.11
- VernacularTitle:肺癌筛查领域指南方法学质量的系统评价
- Author:
LI JIANG
1
;
SU KAI
;
LI FANG
;
TANG WEI
;
HUANG YAO
;
WANG LE
;
HUANG HUIYAO
;
SHI JUFANG
;
DAI MIN
Author Information
1. 100021北京，国家癌症中心/中国医学科学院北京协和医学院肿瘤医院，城市癌症早诊早治项目办公室
- Keywords:
Lung neoplasms;
Screening;
Guideline methodology;
AGREE II;
Systematic review
- From:
Chinese Journal of Lung Cancer
2016;19(10):692-699
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Background and objective Lung cancer is the most common malignancy and screening can decrease the mortality. High quality screening guideline is necessary and important for effective work. Our study is to review and evalu-ate the basic characteristics and methodology quality of the current global lung cancer screening guidelines so as to provide useful information for domestic study in the future.Methods Electronic searches were done in English and Chinese databases including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, CBM, Wanfang, and some cancer offcial websites. Articles were screened according to the predeifned inclusion and exclusion criteria by two researchers. hTe quality of guidelines was assessed by AGREE II.Results At last, a total of 11 guidelines with methodology were included. hTe guidelines were is-sued mainly by USA (81%). Canada and China developed one, respectively. As for quality, the average score in the “Scale and objective” of all guidelines was 80, the average score in the “Participants” was 52, the average score in the “rigorism” was 50, the average score in the “clarity” was 76, the average score in the “application” was 43 and the average score in the “independence”was 59. hTe highest average score was found in 2013 and 2015. Canada guideline had higher quality in six domains. 7 guidelines were evaluated as A level.Conclusion hTe number of clinical guidelines showed an increasing trend. Most guidelines were issued by developed countries with heavy burden. Multi-country contribution to one guideline was another trend. Evidence-based methodology was accepted globally in the guideline development.
