Methodology and report quality evaluation of multiple sclerosis guidelines and  consensus

Objective To systematically evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of domestic and international guidelines and consensus on multiple sclerosis (MS).Methods CNKI, WanFang, VIP, CBM, PubMed, Embase, NGC, NICE, GIN, and Medlive were searched from January 1, 2013, to May 31, 2024. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological and reporting quality of the included guidelines and consensus using the AGREE Ⅱ and RIGHT tools, respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to evaluate consistency.Results A total of 10 guidelines and 11 consensus were included. These were published between 2015 and 2024, in various countries including China, the United States, the United Kingdom and France. The ICC values for the two tools were both > 0.75. In terms of AGREE Ⅱ methodological quality assessment, the average standardized scores in the domains of scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, and editorial independence were 85.58%, 61.77%, 43.40%, 89.42%, 61.01%, and 68.25%, respectively. The scores across various fields are as follows: 4 guidelines rated as A, 17 guidelines rated as B, and none rated as C. Four high-quality guidelines were identified. The average reporting rate for RIGHT was 57.79%. In terms of RIGHT reporting quality, the reporting rates for basic information, background, evidence, recommendations, review and quality assurance, funding, declaration and management of interest, and other information were 80.16%, 68.90%, 24.05%, 66.67%, 19.05%, 53.27%, and 50.79%, respectively.Conclusion The overall quality of the included MS guidelines/consensuses is moderate, and the methodological and reporting quality needs further improvement. Future development of MS guidelines and consensus should adhere strictly to international standards to ensure high-quality guidelines that provide clear and standardized guidance for clinical practice.

Publication Details

Journal
SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Published
2025-03-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.12173/j.issn.1004-5511.202410156
Primary Topic
Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Methodology and report quality evaluation of multiple sclerosis guidelines and  consensus

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
article

Methodology and report quality evaluation of multiple sclerosis guidelines and  consensus

article en

Abstract

Objective To systematically evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of domestic and international guidelines and consensus on multiple sclerosis (MS).Methods CNKI, WanFang, VIP, CBM, PubMed, Embase, NGC, NICE, GIN, and Medlive were searched from January 1, 2013, to May 31, 2024. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological and reporting quality of the included guidelines and consensus using the AGREE Ⅱ and RIGHT tools, respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to evaluate consistency.Results A total of 10 guidelines and 11 consensus were included. These were published between 2015 and 2024, in various countries including China, the United States, the United Kingdom and France. The ICC values for the two tools were both > 0.75. In terms of AGREE Ⅱ methodological quality assessment, the average standardized scores in the domains of scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, and editorial independence were 85.58%, 61.77%, 43.40%, 89.42%, 61.01%, and 68.25%, respectively. The scores across various fields are as follows: 4 guidelines rated as A, 17 guidelines rated as B, and none rated as C. Four high-quality guidelines were identified. The average reporting rate for RIGHT was 57.79%. In terms of RIGHT reporting quality, the reporting rates for basic information, background, evidence, recommendations, review and quality assurance, funding, declaration and management of interest, and other information were 80.16%, 68.90%, 24.05%, 66.67%, 19.05%, 53.27%, and 50.79%, respectively.Conclusion The overall quality of the included MS guidelines/consensuses is moderate, and the methodological and reporting quality needs further improvement. Future development of MS guidelines and consensus should adhere strictly to international standards to ensure high-quality guidelines that provide clear and standardized guidance for clinical practice.

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 55%
Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.