Scientific evidence underlying the American College of Gastroenterology’s clinical practice guidelines
Chase Meyer,
Aaron Bowers,
Cole Wayant,
Jake Checketts,
Jared Scott,
Sanjeev Musuvathy and
Matt Vassar
PLOS ONE, 2018, vol. 13, issue 10, 1-9
Abstract:
Background: Clinical practice guidelines contain recommendations for physicians to determine the most appropriate care for patients. These guidelines systematically combine scientific evidence and clinical judgment, culminating in recommendations intended to optimize patient care. The recommendations in CPGs are supported by evidence which varies in quality. We aim to survey the clinical practice guidelines created by the American College of Gastroenterology, report the level of evidence supporting their recommendations, and identify areas where evidence can be improved with additional research. Methods: We extracted 1328 recommendations from 39 clinical practice guidelines published by the American College of Gastroenterology. Several of the clinical practice guidelines used the differing classifications of evidence for their recommendations. To standardize our results, we devised a uniform system for evidence. Results: A total of 39 clinical practice guidelines were surveyed in our study. Together they account for 1328 recommendations. 693 (52.2%) of the recommendations were based on low evidence, indicating poor evidence or expert opinion. Among individual guidelines, 13/39 (33.3%) had no recommendations based on high evidence. Conclusion: Very few recommendations made by the American College of Gastroenterology are supported by high levels of evidence. More than half of all recommendations made by the American College of Gastroenterology are based on low-quality evidence or expert opinion.
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:
Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0204720 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 04720&type=printable (application/pdf)
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0204720
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0204720
Access Statistics for this article
More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().