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.

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

Objective:To investigate the awareness of clinical practice guidelines (referred to as "guidelines") and experts consensus (referred to as "consensus") among otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery medical staff, and to analyze the effectiveness of the ninth guideline methodology workshop.Methods:Self-designed survey questionnaires were used to conduct two surveys among otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery medical staff who participated in the ninth guideline methodology workshop held in Chengdu from Jannuary 10 to 11, 2025, both before and after the training, to assess their awareness and knowledge of guideline and consensus development methodology. The effectiveness of the training was evaluated using the paired chi-square test.Results:A total of 77 peoples (95.06%), who participated in the ninth guideline methodology workshop, completed the survey questionnaires both before and after the training. One-third of the respondents reported a relatively good to very good understanding of guideline and consensus development. The overall methodology of the guidelines and consensus they had participated in developing still showed room for improvement. After the methodology training, the score rate for each test question significantly increased compared to before the training ( P<0.05), and the distribution trend of the total scores changed markedly (Before the training, 71 people scored less than 60 points, 4 people scored 60 points, and 2 people scored 70 points. After the training, only 1 person scored less than 60 points, 1 person scored 60 points, and 75 people scored between 70 and 100 points, of which 21 people scored 100 points). Conclusion:The awareness of guideline and consensus development methodology among otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery medical staff still has room for improvement. The guideline methodology workshop can enhance participants′ mastery of guideline and consensus development methodology.

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.

To introduce and analyze guideline terminology related to clinical question formulation, evidence retrieval and appraisal, and recommendation development.

The real-time Delphi method represents a refinement of the classical Delphi technique, designed to overcome limitations such as prolonged study duration and delayed feedback during consensus development. This article, building upon the classical Delphi foundation, systematically elaborates on the application process, advantages, and limitations of the real-time Delphi method. It further presents currently available websites or software capable of facilitating real-time Delphi exercises and offers considerations and recommendations for its application in guideline development, aiming to serve as a reference for relevant researchers.