Literature DB >> 30874755

Levels of Evidence Supporting American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and European Society of Cardiology Guidelines, 2008-2018.

Alexander C Fanaroff1, Robert M Califf2,3,4, Stephan Windecker5, Sidney C Smith6, Renato D Lopes1.   

Abstract

Importance: Clinical decisions are ideally based on evidence generated from multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating clinical outcomes, but historically, few clinical guideline recommendations have been based entirely on this type of evidence. Objective: To determine the class and level of evidence (LOE) supporting current major cardiovascular society guideline recommendations, and changes in LOE over time. Data Sources: Current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) clinical guideline documents (2008-2018), as identified on cardiovascular society websites, and immediate predecessors to these guideline documents (1999-2014), as referenced in current guideline documents. Study Selection: Comprehensive guideline documents including recommendations organized by class and LOE. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The number of recommendations and the distribution of LOE (A [supported by data from multiple RCTs or a single, large RCT], B [supported by data from observational studies or a single RCT], and C [supported by expert opinion only]) were determined for each guideline document. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of guideline recommendations supported by evidence from multiple RCTs (LOE A).
Results: Across 26 current ACC/AHA guidelines (2930 recommendations; median, 121 recommendations per guideline [25th-75th percentiles, 76-155]), 248 recommendations (8.5%) were classified as LOE A, 1465 (50.0%) as LOE B, and 1217 (41.5%) as LOE C. The median proportion of LOE A recommendations was 7.9% (25th-75th percentiles, 0.9%-15.2%). Across 25 current ESC guideline documents (3399 recommendations; median, 130 recommendations per guideline [25th-75th percentiles, 111-154]), 484 recommendations (14.2%) were classified as LOE A, 1053 (31.0%) as LOE B, and 1862 (54.8%) as LOE C. When comparing current guidelines with prior versions, the proportion of recommendations that were LOE A did not increase in either ACC/AHA (median, 9.0% [current] vs 11.7% [prior]) or ESC guidelines (median, 15.1% [current] vs 17.6% [prior]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among recommendations in major cardiovascular society guidelines, only a small percentage were supported by evidence from multiple RCTs or a single, large RCT. This pattern does not appear to have meaningfully improved from 2008 to 2018.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30874755      PMCID: PMC6439920          DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.1122

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  40 in total

1.  Relevance of Guidelines.

Authors:  Om Prakash Yadava; Philippe Kolh
Journal:  Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2020-06-13

Review 2.  A comparison of international clinical practice guidelines on adult chronic rhinosinusitis shows considerable variability of recommendations for diagnosis and treatment.

Authors:  N M Kaper; G J M G van der Heijden; S H Cuijpers; R J Stokroos; M C J Aarts
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Primary prevention aspirin among the elderly: challenges in translating trial evidence to the clinic.

Authors:  J William McEvoy; Michael Keane; Justin Ng
Journal:  Br J Cardiol       Date:  2020-03-04

4.  Foreword.

Authors: 
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2022-06-29

5.  Evaluation of Conflicts of Interest among Participants of the Japanese Nephrology Clinical Practice Guideline.

Authors:  Anju Murayama; Kohki Yamada; Makoto Yoshida; Yudai Kaneda; Hiroaki Saito; Toyoaki Sawano; Sunil Shrestha; Rajeev Shrestha; Tetsuya Tanimoto; Akihiko Ozaki
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2022-06       Impact factor: 10.614

6.  Levels of evidence supporting clinical practice guidelines on invasive aspergillosis.

Authors:  Sofía Tejada; Laura Campogiani; João Ferreira-Coimbra; Stijn Blot; Jordi Rello
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2020-01-03       Impact factor: 3.267

Review 7.  Optimal Antithrombotic Regimens for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Updated Network Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Renato D Lopes; Hwanhee Hong; Ralf E Harskamp; Deepak L Bhatt; Roxana Mehran; Christopher P Cannon; Christopher B Granger; Freek W A Verheugt; Jianghao Li; Jurriën M Ten Berg; Nikolaus Sarafoff; Pascal Vranckx; Andreas Goette; C Michael Gibson; John H Alexander
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 14.676

8.  Inclusion of Performance Parameters and Patient Context in the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Heart Failure.

Authors:  Parag Goyal; Ozan Unlu; Peter J Kennel; Ross C Schumacher; Lauren G Gilstrap; Ashok Krishnaswami; Larry A Allen; Mathew S Maurer; Michael W Rich; Anil Makam
Journal:  J Card Fail       Date:  2020-10-14       Impact factor: 5.712

9.  Consequences of Slow Progress Toward Pragmatism in Randomized Clinical Trials: It Is Time to Get Practical.

Authors:  Fatima Rodriguez; Robert M Califf; Robert A Harrington
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 30.154

Review 10.  What can a learning healthcare system teach us about improving outcomes?

Authors:  Jonathan D Casey; Katherine R Courtright; Todd W Rice; Matthew W Semler
Journal:  Curr Opin Crit Care       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 3.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.