To systematically analyzed the reporting status of core elements in publicly available clinical practice guideline(hereafter referred to as "guideline") protocols published domestically and internationally over the past decade, identified existing problems, and provided evidence to inform the standardized writing and publication of future guideline protocols.

The importance of consensus research in medical decision-making has become increasinglyprominent. However, this field has long lacked unified terminology definitions and reporting standards, leading to significant heterogeneity in study design, implementation, and result presentation that affects the credibility and reproducibility of outcomes. The ACCurate COnsensus Reporting Document (ACCORD) in the field of biomedical research provides a structured writing framework for various consensus methods such as the Delphi method and nominal group technique, aiming to enhance the completeness and transparency of study reports. Combined with specific cases, this article interprets the core items of ACCORD, offering references for the design, implementation, and reporting of high-quality consensus research in China.

Health economics evidence plays an important role in linking clinical value evidence with health resource allocation decisions in the development of clinical practice guidelines. It can not only effectively balance clinical effectiveness and economic feasibility but also avoid forming "idealized" recommendations that are detached from the affordability of the healthcare system or the burden-bearing capacity of patients. To promote guideline developers to use health economics evidence more standardizedly and fully, this paper conducts an in-depth analysis of the current application status, existing challenges, access channels, and application processes of health economics evidence in current guidelines, and on this basis, puts forward considerations and suggestions for strengthening and standardizing the application of health economics evidence in China's clinical practice guidelines.

This study explores methodological issues in the design， evaluation， and reporting of randomized controlled trials （RCTs） under the concept of "syndrome dominating disease". The discussion focuses on key aspects including the adaptability of trial design， the screening of research participants， the standardization of syndrome differentiation， the balance between intervention individualization and standardization， the integration of multi-dimensional outcome measures， and the limitations of existing evaluation and reporting tools when applied to this type of research， along with corresponding recommendations and future perspectives. Regarding research design， it is recommended to select or draw upon innovative design concepts such as basket trials and subgroup-based dynamic/static parallel-group designs， in order to innovate the design format of RCTs. Meanwhile， criteria for participant screening， TCM syndrome differentiation， and disease classification should be standardized. The balance should be appropriately achieved between intervention individualization and standardization， and a multidimensional assessment system encompassing TCM syndromes， disease-specific outcomes， and patient-reported outcomes should be established. For risk of bias assessment and research reporting， it is recommended，to develop specialized assessment and reporting tools based on existing instruments， in order to standardize the assessment and reporting of study findings. Future research may further explore the potential applications of artificial intelligence in the study design， risk-of-bias assessment， and reporting quality assessment of RCTs based on the "syndrome dominating disease" model， with a particular focus on methodological optimization， data integration， and enhancement of research quality.

This study explores methodological issues in the design， evaluation， and reporting of randomized controlled trials （RCTs） under the concept of "syndrome dominating disease". The discussion focuses on key aspects including the adaptability of trial design， the screening of research participants， the standardization of syndrome differentiation， the balance between intervention individualization and standardization， the integration of multi-dimensional outcome measures， and the limitations of existing evaluation and reporting tools when applied to this type of research， along with corresponding recommendations and future perspectives. Regarding research design， it is recommended to select or draw upon innovative design concepts such as basket trials and subgroup-based dynamic/static parallel-group designs， in order to innovate the design format of RCTs. Meanwhile， criteria for participant screening， TCM syndrome differentiation， and disease classification should be standardized. The balance should be appropriately achieved between intervention individualization and standardization， and a multidimensional assessment system encompassing TCM syndromes， disease-specific outcomes， and patient-reported outcomes should be established. For risk of bias assessment and research reporting， it is recommended，to develop specialized assessment and reporting tools based on existing instruments， in order to standardize the assessment and reporting of study findings. Future research may further explore the potential applications of artificial intelligence in the study design， risk-of-bias assessment， and reporting quality assessment of RCTs based on the "syndrome dominating disease" model， with a particular focus on methodological optimization， data integration， and enhancement of research quality.

Clinical practice guidelines serve as a crucial bridge linking research evidence, clinical practice, and health policy decision-making. However, the guideline domain continues to face persistent challenges, including duplicate guideline development, variable methodological quality, lack of transparent reporting, insufficient implementation and translation, and delayed updates. Focusing solely on "how to develop a high-quality guideline" is no longer sufficient to meet the modern healthcare system's demands for timely, trustworthy, actionable, and dynamically updated recommendations. The emergence of the guideline ecosystem marks a shift in guideline research and practice from a linear development process toward a more systematic governance model. Rooted in the evidence ecosystem, the guideline ecosystem has its own distinct functional positioning, encompassing recommendation formulation, clinical implementation, and life-cycle updating. Looking ahead, China should leverage guideline registries, integrated quality assessment systems, implementation science, dynamic updating mechanisms, and artificial intelligence technologies to promote the transformation of its guideline system from scale expansion to an ecosystem-based model characterized by high quality and sustainability.

To develop a guideline terminology system and promote its standardization, thereby enhancing medical staff's accurate understanding and correct application of guidelines.

The aim of this updated guideline is to provide comprehensive recommendations for the management of gout in patients with common comorbidities, such as chronic kidney disease(CKD), cardiovascular disease(CVD), diabetes, osteoarthritis(OA), and gastrointestinal disorders. This guideline was developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel consisting of specialists in endocrinology, rheumatology, nephrology, cardiology, gastroenterology, and methodology. The development process adhered to standard methodologies, including PICO(population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes) question deconstruction, systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation(GRADE) for evidence and recommendation evaluation, Delphi voting, and expert consensus. The guideline presents 26 evidence-based recommendations addressing 7 clinical questions for patients with hyperuricemia and gout in the context of comorbidities. Key recommendations include the maintenance of strict serum urate targets, particularly for patients with CKD stage≥3, chronic gouty arthritis, and OA, in order to prevent disease progression. In patients with CVD or diabetes, intra-articular triamcinolone is preferred over systemic glucocorticoids. Prioritized anti-inflammatory treatments for patients with CKD, gastrointestinal diseases and OA are recommended. The guideline also introduces emerging therapies, such as interleukin-1 inhibitors and selective urate transport inhibitors, as potential treatment options for refractory cases. The update offers a comprehensive, patient-centered approach to managing gout, particularly in individuals with associated comorbidities. Multidisciplinary collaboration and emerging new treatments and evidence ensure the optimization of the recommendations.

Objective To sort,summarize,and introduce key terms related to guideline reporting,evaluation,dissemination,implementation,and updating.Methods We systematically searched guideline de-velopment manuals and methodological literature from database inception to October 25,2024.Terms related to guideline reporting,updating,evaluation,and implementation were extracted,standardized,and finalized through a structured consensus process.Results A total of 13 guideline manuals and 32 methodological articles were included,yielding 14 core terms with standardized definitions.Conclusions This article introduces key terms such as reporting standards,external review,and research gaps across guideline development phases to promote concept application and deepen readers'understanding of guideline development.

Objective:To determine the clinical issues in the Clinical practice guidelines for postoperative pain management in adults (2024 edition). Methods:A preliminary list of clinical issues for the guidelines was developed through literature review, clinical surveys, and expert interviews. This was followed by two rounds of Delphi questionnaire surveys, with quality control and statistical analysis conducted using expert positive coefficient, mean item scores, full score ratio, coefficient of variation, Cronbach′s α coefficient, and expert authority level to finalize the list of clinical issues.Results:The experts participating in the Delphi questionnaire surveys had multidisciplinary collaborative backgrounds and regional representativeness, with a high level of authority. The overall positive coefficient of expert participation in the surveys was 78.9%. Through two rounds of the Delphi method and based on the screening criteria of a mean score ≥3.5, coefficient of variation ≤30%, and full score ratio ≥30%, 17 clinical issues were ultimately included following an expert consensus meeting.Conclusions:Through the Delphi method and rigorous quality control, the clinical issues in the Clinical practice guidelines for postoperative pain management in adults (2024 edition) are determined, laying a foundation for the subsequent development of the guidelines.