Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on pancreatic cancer using the RIGHT checklist

Qiwen Zhang; Jingli Lu; Mengmeng Jia; Yanfang Ma; Mingyang Sun; Xiaoxu Chen; Xiaohua Ma; Yongjie Yang; Jian Kang; Xiaojian Zhang; Salvatore Paiella; Matthew H G Katz; Kunihiro Tsuchida; Mark Schattner; Shuzhang Du

doi:10.21037/atm-21-2644

Evaluation of the reporting quality of clinical practice guidelines on pancreatic cancer using the RIGHT checklist

Ann Transl Med. 2021 Jul;9(13):1088. doi: 10.21037/atm-21-2644.

Authors

Qiwen Zhang^{1

2}, Jingli Lu^{1

2}, Mengmeng Jia^{1

2}, Yanfang Ma³, Mingyang Sun^{1

2}, Xiaoxu Chen^{1

2}, Xiaohua Ma^{1

2}, Yongjie Yang^{1

2}, Jian Kang^{1

2}, Xiaojian Zhang^{1

2}, Salvatore Paiella⁴, Matthew H G Katz⁵, Kunihiro Tsuchida⁶, Mark Schattner⁷, Shuzhang Du^{1

2}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Pharmacy, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
² Henan Key Laboratory of Precision Clinical Pharmacy, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
³ School of Chinese Medicine of Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong, China.
⁴ General and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Policlinico GB Rossi Hospital, Verona, Italy.
⁵ Department of Surgical Oncology, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
⁶ Division for Therapies Against Intractable Diseases, Institute for Comprehensive Medical Science (ICMS), Fujita Health University, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan.
⁷ Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.

Abstract

Background: The International Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Health Care (RIGHT) statement is a set of recommendations for the reporting in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). We aimed to assess the reporting quality of CPGs for pancreatic cancer following the RIGHT checklist.

Methods: Guidelines for pancreatic cancer were identified by searching electronic databases, guideline databases, and medical society websites. The reporting quality was evaluated by calculating the adherence to the items of the RIGHT checklist and summarizing them over the seven domains and the entire checklist. We also present results stratified by selected characteristics.

Results: A total of 22 guidelines were found eligible. Mean overall adherence to the RIGHT items was 60.0%. All guidelines adhered to the RIGHT items 3, 7a, 13a, while no guidelines reported the items 14c or 18b, which are some of the topics dealing with rationale for recommendations and funding source, respectively. Of the seven domains of the RIGHT checklist, "Review and quality assurance" and "Funding and declaration and management of interests" had the lowest reporting rates (25.0% and 43.2%, respectively); the remaining five domains had reporting rates >50%. CPGs that reported funding support, were published in higher-impact journals, and that applied a grading system for the quality of evidence, tended to have higher reporting rates.

Conclusions: Our results show that reporting quality of pancreatic cancer CPGs still needs to be improved. The use of the RIGHT statement should be encouraged when developing new guidelines.

Keywords: International Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Health Care checklist (RIGHT checklist); Pancreatic cancer; clinical practice guidelines (CPGs); reporting quality.

Grants and funding

P30 CA008748/CA/NCI NIH HHS/United States