0
Original Research |

A critical review of the quality of cough clinical practice guidelines

Mei Jiang, Ph.D; Wei-jie Guan, Ph.D; Zhang-fu Fang, Ph.D; Yan-qing Xie, Ph.D; Jia-xing Xie, Ph.D; Hao Chen, M.D; Dang Wei, M.D; Ke-fang Lai, M.D; Nan-shan Zhong, M.D
Author and Funding Information

Funding: None declared.

Conflicts of interest: All Authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Corresponding author: Nan-shan Zhong, M. D., State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Disease, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China. Address: 151 Yanjiang Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.

∗∗Corresponding author: Ke-fang Lai, M. D., State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Disease, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China. Address: 151 Yanjiang Road, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.


Copyright 2016, American College of Chest Physicians. All Rights Reserved.


Chest. 2016. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2016.04.028
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Abstract

Background  Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been developed to provide healthcare practitioners with the best possible evidence, but their quality varies greatly.

Objective  To systematically evaluate the quality of cough CPGs and identify gaps limiting evidence-based practice.

Methods  Systematic searches were conducted to identify cough CPGs in guideline databases, developers’ websites and MEDLINE. Four reviewers independently evaluated eligible guidelines using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II). Agreement among reviewers was assessed by intra-class correlation coefficient. The number of recommendations, strength of recommendation, and levels of evidence were determined.

Results  Fifteen cough CPGs were identified. An overall high-degree agreement among reviewers was observed (intra-class correlation coefficient: 0.82; 95% confidence interval: 0.79-0.85). The quality ranged from good to acceptable in scope and purpose (mean: 72%, range: 54-93%) and clarity and presentation domains (mean: 68%, range: 50-90%), but not in stakeholder involvement (mean: 36%, range: 18-90%), rigour of development (mean: 36%, range: 9-93%), applicability (mean: 23%, range: 9-83%) and editorial independence domains (mean: 24%, range: 0-96%). Seven guidelines (46.7%) were considered ‘strongly recommended’ or ‘recommended with modifications’ for clinical practice. More than 70% of recommendations were based on non-randomized studies (level C, 30.4%) and expert opinion (level D, 41.3%).

Conclusions  The quality of cough CPGs is variable and recommendations are largely based on low-quality evidence. There is a significant room for improvement to develop high-quality guidelines, which urgently warrants high-quality researches to minimize the vital gaps in the evidence for formulation of cough CPGs.


Sign In to Access Full Content

MEMBER & INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIBER

Want Access?

NEW TO CHEST?

Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.

Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.

Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.

INSTITUTIONAL ACCESS

Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.

Sign In to Access Full Content

MEMBER & INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIBER

Want Access?

NEW TO CHEST?

Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.

Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.

Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.

INSTITUTIONAL ACCESS

Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.

Figures

Tables

References

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Sign In to Access Full Content

MEMBER & INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIBER

Want Access?

NEW TO CHEST?

Become a CHEST member and receive a FREE subscription as a benefit of membership.

Individuals can purchase this article on ScienceDirect.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal.

Individuals can purchase a subscription to the journal or buy individual articles.

Learn more about membership or Purchase a Full Subscription.

INSTITUTIONAL ACCESS

Institutional access is now available through ScienceDirect and can be purchased at myelsevier.com.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Find Similar Articles
CHEST Journal Articles
PubMed Articles
  • CHEST Journal
    Print ISSN: 0012-3692
    Online ISSN: 1931-3543