OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of the first batch of Chinese evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument. METHODS: Evidence-based CPGs in TCM supported by the World Health Organization Western Pacific Regional Office (WHO/WPRO) and whose development was organized by the China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences were identified and manually retrieved. CPGs were assessed using the AGREE instrument, and the data in each CPG were analyzed in terms of the six domains in the AGREE instrument: scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity and presentation, applicability, and editorial independence. RESULTS: Twenty-eight CPGs were identified, of which 26 were included in the study. The AGREE instrument rated the 26 CPGs in terms of the six domains. The assessment results showed the following average scores: for editorial independence, 84.16%; for rigor of development, 80.95%; for scope and purpose, 79.96%; for clarity and presentation, 70.88%; for stakeholder involvement, 61.28%; for applicability, the average score was only 27.09%. In summary, nine CPGs were rated as "strongly recommended", six as "recommended with provision or alternation", and 11 as "unsure". CONCLUSION: Most of the first batch of Chinese evidence-based CPGs in TCM had significant shortcomings in applicability. It is suggested that special attention be paid to enhancing the quality of applicability when developing evidence-based CPGs in TCM.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of the first batch of Chinese evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument. METHODS: Evidence-based CPGs in TCM supported by the World Health Organization Western Pacific Regional Office (WHO/WPRO) and whose development was organized by the China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences were identified and manually retrieved. CPGs were assessed using the AGREE instrument, and the data in each CPG were analyzed in terms of the six domains in the AGREE instrument: scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity and presentation, applicability, and editorial independence. RESULTS: Twenty-eight CPGs were identified, of which 26 were included in the study. The AGREE instrument rated the 26 CPGs in terms of the six domains. The assessment results showed the following average scores: for editorial independence, 84.16%; for rigor of development, 80.95%; for scope and purpose, 79.96%; for clarity and presentation, 70.88%; for stakeholder involvement, 61.28%; for applicability, the average score was only 27.09%. In summary, nine CPGs were rated as "strongly recommended", six as "recommended with provision or alternation", and 11 as "unsure". CONCLUSION: Most of the first batch of Chinese evidence-based CPGs in TCM had significant shortcomings in applicability. It is suggested that special attention be paid to enhancing the quality of applicability when developing evidence-based CPGs in TCM.