UASSIGNED:美国牙科协会(ADA)将循证牙科(EBD)定义为“一种口腔保健方法,需要对临床相关科学证据进行系统评估的明智整合,与口腔和医疗状况和病史有关,与牙医的临床专业知识和患者的治疗需求和偏好。“临床实践指南(CPG)是包括旨在优化患者护理的建议的声明,这些建议是通过对证据的系统审查以及对替代治疗方案的益处和危害的评估而得出的。因此,ADACPGs是EBD最严格的例子,可以为临床实践提供信息。CPGs应具有最高质量水平,以确保临床建议的适当性和及时性。
UNASSIGNED:这项研究的目的是测量ADACPG的方法学严密性和透明度。
UNASSIGNED:每个ADACPG由4名独立评估员使用《研究与评估指南》(AGREEII)工具进行评估。获得6个领域和总体质量的定量质量评分。此外,评估人员通过对每个项目的评论和对完整建议的评估,提供了定性分析。
UNASSIGNED:使用75%的质量评分作为高质量指南的阈值。使用此度量,当前10个ADACPG中有6个被认为是高质量的,1略低于质量阈值,和3被认为是边缘的。即使在总体评估中被评估为高质量的人中,某些领域未达到75%的质量阈值.
未经评估:总的来说,ADACPG共同为临床医生提供高质量的指导.尽管自2016年以来,AGREE评估指南已在CPG开发中使用,但在某些领域仍有改进的空间(即,利益相关者的参与,发展的严谨性,适用性,和编辑独立性)。
UNASSIGNED:这项研究的结果总结了10项现行ADA临床实践指南的方法学严谨性和透明性。自采用AGREE标准(2016年)以来,CPG是均匀的高质量的。较旧的CPG的质量稍低,但总体上被认为是可以接受的。因此,ADACPG可以放心地用于告知从业者严格的循证牙科标准支持的治疗方案。然而,方法学质量仍有改进的空间。
The American Dental Association (ADA) defines evidence-based dentistry (EBD) as \"an approach to oral healthcare that requires the judicious integration of systematic assessments of clinically relevant scientific evidence, relating to the oral and medical condition and history, with the dentist\'s clinical expertise and the patient\'s treatment needs and preferences.\" Clinical practice
guidelines (CPGs) are statements that include recommendations intended to optimize patient care that are informed by a systematic review of evidence and an assessment of the benefits and harms of alternative care options. Therefore, ADA CPGs are the most rigorous examples of EBD to inform clinical practice. CPGs should be of the highest level of quality to ensure the appropriateness and timeliness of clinical recommendations.
The aim of this study was to measure the methodological rigor and transparency of the ADA CPGs.
Each ADA CPG was appraised by 4 independent assessors using the Appraisal of
Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument. Quantitative quality scores were obtained for 6 domains and overall quality. In addition, assessors provided a qualitative analysis by providing comments for each item and an appraisal of the full recommendation.
A quality score of 75% was used as the threshold for high-quality
guidelines. Using this metric, 6 of the current 10 current ADA CPGs were considered to be of high quality, 1 was slightly below the quality threshold, and 3 were considered marginal. Even among those evaluated to be high quality in overall assessment, certain domains did not reach the quality threshold of 75%.
Overall, the ADA CPGs collectively provide high-quality guidance for the clinician. While the AGREE appraisal
guidelines have been used in CPG development since 2016, there is still room for improvement in certain domains (i.e., stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, applicability, and editorial independence).
The results of this study summarize the methodological rigor and transparency of the 10 current ADA clinical practice
guidelines. Since adoption of AGREE standards (2016), CPGs have been uniformly of high quality. The quality of older CPGs was somewhat lower but overall deemed acceptable. Thus, ADA CPGs may be used with confidence to inform practitioners of treatment options supported by rigorous evidence-based dentistry standards. However, there is still room for improvement in methodological quality.