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

Kefeng Liu; Yanfang Ma; Yongjie Yang; Jingli Lu; Jie Zhao; Shuzhang Du; Xuepei Zhang; Chunlei Liu; Francesco Del Giudice; Masaki Shiota; Shingo Hatakeyama; Xiaojian Zhang; Jian Kang

doi:10.21037/atm-21-2956

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

Ann Transl Med. 2021 Jul;9(14):1173. doi: 10.21037/atm-21-2956.

Authors

Kefeng Liu^{1

2}, Yanfang Ma³, Yongjie Yang^{1

2}, Jingli Lu^{1

2}, Jie Zhao^{1

2}, Shuzhang Du^{1

2}, Xuepei Zhang⁴, Chunlei Liu⁴, Francesco Del Giudice⁵, Masaki Shiota⁶, Shingo Hatakeyama⁷, Xiaojian Zhang^{1

2}, Jian Kang^{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, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong, China.
⁴ Urology department, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
⁵ Department of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital, Rome, Italy.
⁶ Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
⁷ Department of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Japan.

Abstract

Background: The International Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) statement is a set of recommendations for reporting in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). We aimed to use RIGHT to evaluate the reporting quality of CPGs on prostate cancer.

Methods: We systematically searched literature databases and websites from January 1, 2018 to December 1, 2020 to identify CPGs on prostate cancer. Two investigators reviewed the identified articles and assessed the reporting quality independently by using the RIGHT checklist. We reported the proportions of guidelines that complied with each of the 35 RIGHT checklist item and the mean reporting compliance percentages for each of the seven domains of RIGHT.

Results: A total of 38 CPGs were included. The mean overall reporting rate over the included CPGs was 51.6%. Eighteen items were reported by more than half of the guidelines four items (1a 3, 7a and 13a) were reported by all guidelines. Items 7b (10.5%), 13b (10.5%), 14c (13.2%), and 18b (7.9%) had the lowest reporting proportions. The mean reporting rates in each RIGHT domain were 74.6% for "Basic Information", 26.3% for "Review and quality assurance", 59.9% for "Background", 43.7% for "Evidence", 43.2% for "Recommendations", 43.4% for "Funding and declaration and management of interests", and 43.0% for "Other information".

Conclusions: The overall adherence of CPGs on prostate cancer to RIGHT checklist is poor. Following the RIGHT checklist during the development of the guideline could improve the quality of reporting in the future.

Keywords: Prostate cancer; Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT); clinical practice guidelines (CPGs); quality.