External review of the recommendations of the Guidelines for Evidence-based Use of Biological Agents for the Clinical Treatment of Osteoporosis: a cross-sectional survey
- VernacularTitle:《骨质疏松症临床治疗生物制剂循证用药指南》推荐意见外审：一项横断面调查
- Author:
Lingling YU
1
,
2
;
Shuang LIU
1
,
2
;
Zaiwei SONG
1
,
2
;
Qiusha YI
3
;
Yu ZHANG
4
;
Liyan MIAO
5
;
Zhenlin ZHANG
6
;
Chunli SONG
7
;
Yaolong CHEN
8
;
Lingli ZHANG
3
;
Rongsheng ZHAO
1
Author Information
1. Dept. of Pharmacy，Peking University Third Hospital，Beijing 100191，China
2. Institute for Drug Evaluation，Peking University Health Science Center，Beijing 100191，China
3. Dept. of Pharmacy，West China Second University Hospital，Sichuan University，Chengdu 610041，China
4. Dept. of Pharmacy，Union Hospital，Tongji Medical College，Huazhong University of Science and Technology，Wuhan 430022，China
5. Dept. of Pharmacy，the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University，Jiangsu Suzhou 215006，China
6. Dept. of Osteoporosis and Bone Disease，Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine，Shanghai 200233，China
7. Dept. of Orthopedics，Peking University Third Hospital，Beijing 100191，China
8. Evidence- based Medicine Center，School of Basic Medical Sciences，Lanzhou University，Lanzhou 730000，China） Δ 基金项目 国家自然科学基金项目（No.72304007
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
osteoporosis;
biological agent;
evidence-based medication guideline;
external review;
recommendations
- From:
China Pharmacy
2025;36(9):1025-1029
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE To assess the scientific rigor， clarity and feasibility of the recommendations of the Guidelines for Evidence-based Use of Biological Agents for the Clinical Treatment of Osteoporosis （hereinafter referred to as the Guideline） through external review， in order to further revise and improve the Guideline recommendations. METHODS This study employed a cross-sectional survey research design， a convenience sampling method was adopted to select frontline medical workers in the field of osteoporosis （including clinical doctors， clinical pharmacists， and nurses） as well as patients or their family members. External review was conducted through a combination of closed-ended and open-ended electronic questionnaires to get feedback from them on the appreciation，clarity and feasibility of the 32 preliminary recommendations in the Guideline. RESULTS A total of 90 external review subjects from 15 hospitals were collected， including 45 clinical doctors， 15 clinical pharmacists， 15 nurses and 15 patients or their family members. The overall appreciation degree of recommendations was 99.38%， the overall clarity degree of recommendations was 98.92%， and the overall feasibility degree of recommendations was 99.65%. At the same time， 111 subjective suggestions were collected， which provided an important reference for the further improvement of the Guideline recommendations. Based on the above feedback， the Guideline steering committee and core expert group revised the wording of 12 draft recommendations without deletion， and finally determined 32 recommendations. CONCLUSIONS The external review provides an important basis for the final formation of the Guideline， further improves the scientific rigor， clarity and feasibility of the recommendations， and ensures the standardization， practicality and implementability of the Guideline.
