The methodological quality of dengue clinical practice guidelines globally. A systematic review

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically review the methodological quality of dengue clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) available globally. METHODS: This systematic review included CPGs on dengue clinical management (clinical diagnosis, investigation and treatment), and the development process of the guidelines, required to be evidence-based and including an expert review process. An electronic search was performed using Google, Google Scholar and PubMed. The search was last performed in September 2025. No language restriction was imposed. The selection of CPGs and cross-checking of data extracted were performed by two independent reviewers with a third to resolve any discrepancies. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE-II) was used to assess the quality of CPGs by four independent reviewers. RESULTS: A total of 29 CPGs published from 2009-2025 in 18 countries were included for review. Overall, six CPGs rated as high quality. Among these six CPGs, only three reported the recommendations with GRADE. Four CPGs adapted other CPGs without transparent review process. Majority of the CPGs fail to demonstrate a robust scientific development process. CONCLUSION: Despite the variability in the quality of the CPGs assessed in this review, several high-quality guidelines were identified as suitable for use. In contrast, a number of CPGs were found to rely heavily on adaptations of existing guidelines while lacking sufficient methodological rigour. Therefore, CPGs that adapt recommendations from other sources should still undertake a full and systematic development process consistent with the AGREE II framework.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
QJM
Published
2026-07-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcag202
Primary Topic
Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The methodological quality of dengue clinical practice guidelines globally. A systematic review

Leiva Mm, Carlos Alberto Montenegro-Quiñonez, Osamudiamen Favour Omosumwen, Olaf Horstick et al.
QJM
Clinical practice guidelines implementation
article

The methodological quality of dengue clinical practice guidelines globally. A systematic review

Leiva Mm, Carlos Alberto Montenegro-Quiñonez, Osamudiamen Favour Omosumwen, Olaf Horstick, María Lastra Cagigas, Leticia del Carmen Castillo Signor, Selvanaayagam Shanmuganathan, Gary K K Low, Vivian Monzon Gomez, Sam Froze Jiee
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically review the methodological quality of dengue clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) available globally. METHODS: This systematic review included CPGs on dengue clinical management (clinical diagnosis, investigation and treatment), and the development process of the guidelines, required to be evidence-based and including an expert review process. An electronic search was performed using Google, Google Scholar and PubMed. The search was last performed in September 2025. No language restriction was imposed. The selection of CPGs and cross-checking of data extracted were performed by two independent reviewers with a third to resolve any discrepancies. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE-II) was used to assess the quality of CPGs by four independent reviewers. RESULTS: A total of 29 CPGs published from 2009-2025 in 18 countries were included for review. Overall, six CPGs rated as high quality. Among these six CPGs, only three reported the recommendations with GRADE. Four CPGs adapted other CPGs without transparent review process. Majority of the CPGs fail to demonstrate a robust scientific development process. CONCLUSION: Despite the variability in the quality of the CPGs assessed in this review, several high-quality guidelines were identified as suitable for use. In contrast, a number of CPGs were found to rely heavily on adaptations of existing guidelines while lacking sufficient methodological rigour. Therefore, CPGs that adapt recommendations from other sources should still undertake a full and systematic development process consistent with the AGREE II framework.

QJM
The University of Sydney (AU), Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala (GT), Heidelberg University (DE), Nepean Hospital (AU), University Hospital Heidelberg (DE), Kingswood University (CA), UNSW Sydney (AU), Universiti Malaysia Sarawak (MY), The Centre for Health (New Zealand) (NZ), Ministry of Public Health and Social Assistance (GT), Global Policy Institute (US), Heidelberg University (US), Australian Catholic University (AU)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Clinical practice guidelines implementation
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.