Methodological quality of English-language genetic guidelines on hereditary breast-cancer screening and management: an evaluation using the AGREE instrument.

Benedetto Simone, Emma De Feo, Nicola Nicolotti, Walter Ricciardi, Stefania Boccia

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

We examined the methodological quality of guidelines on syndromes conferring genetic susceptibility to breast cancer. 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. 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. 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.

Original languageEnglish
Article number143
JournalBMC Medicine
Volume10
Publication statusPublished - 2012

Fingerprint

Early Detection of Cancer
Language
Guidelines
Breast Neoplasms
Genetic Testing
Genetic Predisposition to Disease
PubMed

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Methodological quality of English-language genetic guidelines on hereditary breast-cancer screening and management : an evaluation using the AGREE instrument. / Simone, Benedetto; De Feo, Emma; Nicolotti, Nicola; Ricciardi, Walter; Boccia, Stefania.

In: BMC Medicine, Vol. 10, 143, 2012.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{728e8be663fe4e0a991f201138e2cfa3,
title = "Methodological quality of English-language genetic guidelines on hereditary breast-cancer screening and management: an evaluation using the AGREE instrument.",
abstract = "We examined the methodological quality of guidelines on syndromes conferring genetic susceptibility to breast cancer. 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. 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. 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.",
author = "Benedetto Simone and {De Feo}, Emma and Nicola Nicolotti and Walter Ricciardi and Stefania Boccia",
year = "2012",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
journal = "BMC Medicine",
issn = "1741-7015",
publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

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

Y1 - 2012

N2 - We examined the methodological quality of guidelines on syndromes conferring genetic susceptibility to breast cancer. 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. 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. 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 - We examined the methodological quality of guidelines on syndromes conferring genetic susceptibility to breast cancer. 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. 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. 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84869214021&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84869214021&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 23171648

VL - 10

JO - BMC Medicine

JF - BMC Medicine

SN - 1741-7015

M1 - 143

ER -