TY - JOUR
T1 - Methodological quality of English-language genetic guidelines on hereditary breast-cancer screening and management
T2 - An evaluation using the AGREE instrument
AU - Simone, Benedetto
AU - De Feo, Emma
AU - Nicolotti, Nicola
AU - Ricciardi, Walter
AU - Boccia, Stefania
PY - 2012/11/21
Y1 - 2012/11/21
N2 - Background: We examined the methodological quality of guidelines on syndromes conferring genetic susceptibility to breast cancer. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Google were searched for guidelines published up to October 2010. All guidelines in English were included. The Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument was used to assess the quality of the guidelines, and their reported evidence base was evaluated. Results: Thirteen guidelines were deemed eligible: seven had been developed by independent associations, and the other six had national/state endorsements. Four guidelines performed satisfactorily, achieving a score of greater than 50% in all six AGREE domains. Mean ± SD standardized scores for the six AGREE domains were: 90 ± 9% for 'scope and purpose', 51 ± 18% for 'stakeholder involvement', 55 ± 27% for 'rigour of development', 80 ± 11% for 'clarity and presentation', 37 ± 32% for 'applicability', and 47 ± 38% for 'editorial independence'. Ten of the thirteen guidelines were found to be based on research evidence.Conclusions: Given the ethical implications and the high costs of genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer, guidelines on this topic should provide clear and evidence-based recommendations. Our analysis shows that there is scope for improving many aspects of the methodological quality of current guidelines. The AGREE instrument is a useful tool, and could be used profitably by guidelines developers to improve the quality of recommendations.
AB - Background: We examined the methodological quality of guidelines on syndromes conferring genetic susceptibility to breast cancer. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Google were searched for guidelines published up to October 2010. All guidelines in English were included. The Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument was used to assess the quality of the guidelines, and their reported evidence base was evaluated. Results: Thirteen guidelines were deemed eligible: seven had been developed by independent associations, and the other six had national/state endorsements. Four guidelines performed satisfactorily, achieving a score of greater than 50% in all six AGREE domains. Mean ± SD standardized scores for the six AGREE domains were: 90 ± 9% for 'scope and purpose', 51 ± 18% for 'stakeholder involvement', 55 ± 27% for 'rigour of development', 80 ± 11% for 'clarity and presentation', 37 ± 32% for 'applicability', and 47 ± 38% for 'editorial independence'. Ten of the thirteen guidelines were found to be based on research evidence.Conclusions: Given the ethical implications and the high costs of genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer, guidelines on this topic should provide clear and evidence-based recommendations. Our analysis shows that there is scope for improving many aspects of the methodological quality of current guidelines. The AGREE instrument is a useful tool, and could be used profitably by guidelines developers to improve the quality of recommendations.
KW - BRCA1/2
KW - Breast cancer
KW - Cancer screening
KW - Cancer surveillance
KW - Familial breast/ovarian cancer
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84890230595&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84890230595&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/1741-7015-10-143
DO - 10.1186/1741-7015-10-143
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84890230595
VL - 10
SP - 1
EP - 9
JO - BMC Medicine
JF - BMC Medicine
SN - 1741-7015
M1 - 143
ER -