Quality appraisal of documents producing recommendations for breast, colorectal and cervical cancer screening
<p><strong>Background:</strong> Breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening are evidence-based interventions recommended by most governmental agencies and scientific societies. The aim of this review is to assess the quality of guidelines on screening and to describe differen...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Milano University Press
2014-01-01
|
| Series: | Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Public Health |
| Online Access: | http://ebph.it/article/view/9062 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850038314137026560 |
|---|---|
| author | Paolo Giorgi Rossi Eliana Ferroni Alessandra Barca Pamela Pantano Laura Camilloni Carla Cogo Marica Ferri Piero Borgia Antonio Federici |
| author_facet | Paolo Giorgi Rossi Eliana Ferroni Alessandra Barca Pamela Pantano Laura Camilloni Carla Cogo Marica Ferri Piero Borgia Antonio Federici |
| author_sort | Paolo Giorgi Rossi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <p><strong>Background:</strong> Breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening are evidence-based interventions recommended by most governmental agencies and scientific societies. The aim of this review is to assess the quality of guidelines on screening and to describe differences according to the context in which they were produced.</p><p><strong>Methods:</strong> A literature search of the main databases, websites on health care, and guidelines, as well as the websites of several scientific societies was carried out in order to identify the most recent guidelines (since 2000) on cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening. Only documents written in Italian or English were included. Two investigators independently assessed quality by using the AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation in Europe) instrument.</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> Thirty-three, 32, and 18 relevant documents for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer, respectively, were identified. Only some documents (19, 12 and 13 for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer, respectively) could be evaluated with AGREE. Items included in the domain “scope and purpose” obtained the highest scores, followed by “clarity of presentation” domain, while “applicability”, “patient involvement,” and “conflict of interest disclosure” domains obtained the lowest scores. The quality did not improve in more recent documents. Documents produced by governmental agencies, on average, had higher scores than documents by scientific societies, particularly for “stakeholder involvement” and “applicability”.</p><p><strong>Conclusions</strong>: Documents from different countries and health systems differ in terms of the main recommendations given and in the quality of the documents. Those produced by governmental agencies have a more multidisciplinary authorship and pay more attention to applicability than do those produced by scientific societies.</p><p> societies.</p> |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-98f763ad160f4b838cedfdc497373747 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2282-0930 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2014-01-01 |
| publisher | Milano University Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Public Health |
| spelling | doaj-art-98f763ad160f4b838cedfdc4973737472025-08-20T02:56:37ZengMilano University PressEpidemiology, Biostatistics and Public Health2282-09302014-01-0111310.2427/90628980Quality appraisal of documents producing recommendations for breast, colorectal and cervical cancer screeningPaolo Giorgi Rossi0Eliana Ferroni1Alessandra Barca2Pamela Pantano3Laura Camilloni4Carla Cogo5Marica Ferri6Piero Borgia7Antonio Federici8Servizio Interaziendale di Epidemiologia, AUSL Reggio EmiliaEpidemiology Department, Lazio Region, Rome, Italy.Agency for Public Health, Lazio Region, Rome, ItalyAgency for Public Health, Lazio Region, Rome, ItalyAgency for Public Health, Lazio Region, Rome, ItalyRegistro Tumori del Veneto, Padua, Italy.European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), Lisbon, Portugal.Agency for Public Health, Lazio Region, Rome, Italy.Ministry of Health, Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Rome, Italy.<p><strong>Background:</strong> Breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening are evidence-based interventions recommended by most governmental agencies and scientific societies. The aim of this review is to assess the quality of guidelines on screening and to describe differences according to the context in which they were produced.</p><p><strong>Methods:</strong> A literature search of the main databases, websites on health care, and guidelines, as well as the websites of several scientific societies was carried out in order to identify the most recent guidelines (since 2000) on cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening. Only documents written in Italian or English were included. Two investigators independently assessed quality by using the AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation in Europe) instrument.</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> Thirty-three, 32, and 18 relevant documents for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer, respectively, were identified. Only some documents (19, 12 and 13 for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer, respectively) could be evaluated with AGREE. Items included in the domain “scope and purpose” obtained the highest scores, followed by “clarity of presentation” domain, while “applicability”, “patient involvement,” and “conflict of interest disclosure” domains obtained the lowest scores. The quality did not improve in more recent documents. Documents produced by governmental agencies, on average, had higher scores than documents by scientific societies, particularly for “stakeholder involvement” and “applicability”.</p><p><strong>Conclusions</strong>: Documents from different countries and health systems differ in terms of the main recommendations given and in the quality of the documents. Those produced by governmental agencies have a more multidisciplinary authorship and pay more attention to applicability than do those produced by scientific societies.</p><p> societies.</p>http://ebph.it/article/view/9062 |
| spellingShingle | Paolo Giorgi Rossi Eliana Ferroni Alessandra Barca Pamela Pantano Laura Camilloni Carla Cogo Marica Ferri Piero Borgia Antonio Federici Quality appraisal of documents producing recommendations for breast, colorectal and cervical cancer screening Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Public Health |
| title | Quality appraisal of documents producing recommendations for breast, colorectal and cervical cancer screening |
| title_full | Quality appraisal of documents producing recommendations for breast, colorectal and cervical cancer screening |
| title_fullStr | Quality appraisal of documents producing recommendations for breast, colorectal and cervical cancer screening |
| title_full_unstemmed | Quality appraisal of documents producing recommendations for breast, colorectal and cervical cancer screening |
| title_short | Quality appraisal of documents producing recommendations for breast, colorectal and cervical cancer screening |
| title_sort | quality appraisal of documents producing recommendations for breast colorectal and cervical cancer screening |
| url | http://ebph.it/article/view/9062 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT paologiorgirossi qualityappraisalofdocumentsproducingrecommendationsforbreastcolorectalandcervicalcancerscreening AT elianaferroni qualityappraisalofdocumentsproducingrecommendationsforbreastcolorectalandcervicalcancerscreening AT alessandrabarca qualityappraisalofdocumentsproducingrecommendationsforbreastcolorectalandcervicalcancerscreening AT pamelapantano qualityappraisalofdocumentsproducingrecommendationsforbreastcolorectalandcervicalcancerscreening AT lauracamilloni qualityappraisalofdocumentsproducingrecommendationsforbreastcolorectalandcervicalcancerscreening AT carlacogo qualityappraisalofdocumentsproducingrecommendationsforbreastcolorectalandcervicalcancerscreening AT maricaferri qualityappraisalofdocumentsproducingrecommendationsforbreastcolorectalandcervicalcancerscreening AT pieroborgia qualityappraisalofdocumentsproducingrecommendationsforbreastcolorectalandcervicalcancerscreening AT antoniofederici qualityappraisalofdocumentsproducingrecommendationsforbreastcolorectalandcervicalcancerscreening |