Abstract
Objective
To inform the development of an AGREE II extension specifically tailored for surgical guidelines.
Summary background data
AGREE II was designed to inform the development, reporting, and appraisal of clinical practice guidelines. Previous research has suggested substantial room for improvement of the quality of surgical guidelines.
Methods
A previously published search in MEDLINE for clinical practice guidelines published by surgical scientific organizations with an international scope between 2008 and 2017, resulted in a total of 67 guidelines. The quality of these guidelines was assessed using AGREE II. We performed a series of statistical analyses (reliability, correlation and Factor Analysis, Item Response Theory) with the objective to calibrate AGREE II for use specifically in surgical guidelines.
Results
Reliability/correlation/factor analysis and Item Response Theory produced similar results and suggested that a structure of 5 domains, instead of 6 domains of the original instrument, might be more appropriate. Furthermore, exclusion and re-arrangement of items to other domains was found to increase the reliability of AGREE II when applied in surgical guidelines.
Conclusions
The findings of this study suggest that statistical calibration of AGREE II might improve the development, reporting, and appraisal of surgical guidelines.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Graham R, Mancher M, Miller Wolman D, Greenfield S, Steinberg E (eds) (2011) Clinical practice guidelines we can trust. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Standards for Develo** Trustworthy Clinical Practice Guidelines. National Academies Press, Washington (DC).
Antoniou SA et al (2019) Guideline assessment project: filling the GAP in surgical guidelines: quality improvement initiative by an International Working Group. Ann Surg 269:642–651. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000003036
Guyatt GH et al (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336:924–926. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD
Alhazzani W, Guyatt G (2018) An overview of the GRADE approach and a peek at the future. Med J Aust 209:291–292. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja18.00012
Brouwers MC et al (2010) Development of the AGREE II, part 1: performance, usefulness and areas for improvement. Can Med Assoc J 182:1045–1052. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.091714
Brouwers MC et al (2010) Development of the AGREE II, part 2: assessment of validity of items and tools to support application. Can Med Assoc J 182:E472–E478. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.091716
Schünemann H, Brożek J, Guyatt G, Oxman A (eds) (2013) GRADE handbook for grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. The GRADE Working Group. Available from guidelinedevelopment.org/handbook. Accessed 4 Jan 2021
Brouwers MC, Kerkvliet K, Spithoff K (2016) The AGREE reporting checklist: a tool to improve reporting of clinical practice guidelines. BMJ 352:i1152. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i1152
World Health Organization (2012) WHO Handbook for Guideline Development. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/75146/1/9789241548441_eng.pdf. Accessed 4 Jan 2021
NICE, T. G. M. G. A. G. https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg6/chapter/reviewing-the-evidence. Accessed 2 Oct 2017
Norris SL et al (2016) The skills and experience of GRADE methodologists can be assessed with a simple tool. J Clin Epidemiol 79:150-158.e151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.07.001
Tavakol M, Dennick R (2011) Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int J Med Educ 2:53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02310555
Nunnally JC (1978) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New York
Bhattacherjee A (2012) Social science research: principles, methods, and practices. Textbooks Collection. 3. Available from http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/oa_textbooks/3. Accessed 4 Jan 2021
Pearson K, Pearson ES (1922) On polychoric coefficients of correlation. Biometrika 14:127–156. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/14.1-2.127
Olsson U (1979) Maximum likelihood estimation of the polychoric correlation coefficient. Psychometrika 44:443–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296207
Reckase MD (2009) Multidimensional item response theory. Springer, New York
AGREE II Extension for Surgical Guidelines. https://gap-project.org. Accessed 30 Mar 2020
Funding
The authors received no funding for this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Disclosures
Mrs. Sofia Tsokani, Dr. Stavros A. Antoniou, Prof. Irini Moustaki, Prof. Manuel López-Cano, Mr George A. Antoniou, Prof. Ivan D. Flórez, Prof. Gianfranco Silecchia, Mr Sheraz Markar, Prof. Dimitrios Stefanidis, Prof. Giovanni Zanninotto, Prof Nader K. Francis, Prof George H. Hanna, Prof. Salvador Morales-Conde, Prof. Hendrik Jaap Bonjer, Prof. Melissa C. Brouwers, and Prof. Dimitrios Mavridis, PhD have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tsokani, S., Antoniou, S.A., Moustaki, I. et al. Guideline Assessment Project II: statistical calibration informed the development of an AGREE II extension for surgical guidelines. Surg Endosc 35, 4061–4068 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08604-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08604-w