MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004991468 · doi:10.1186/ar2339

A critical appraisal of guidelines for the management of knee osteoarthritis using Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation criteria

2007· review· en· W2004991468 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Poitras, Jérôme Avouac, Michel Rossignol, Bernard Avouac, Christine Cedraschi, Margareta Nordin, Chantal Rousseaux, Sylvie Rozenberg, Bernard Savarieau, P. Thoumie, Jean‐Pierre Valat, Éric Vignon, Pascal Hilliquin

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Research & Therapy · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCritical appraisalMedicineOsteoarthritisRheumatologyPhysical therapyMedical physicsAlternative medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clinical practice guidelines have been elaborated to summarize evidence related to the management of knee osteoarthritis and to facilitate uptake of evidence-based knowledge by clinicians. The objectives of the present review were summarizing the recommendations of existing guidelines on knee osteoarthritis, and assessing the quality of the guidelines using a standardized and validated instrument--the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) tool. Internet medical literature databases from 2001 to 2006 were searched for guidelines, with six guidelines being identified. Thirteen clinician researchers participated in the review. Each reviewer was trained in the AGREE instrument. The guidelines were distributed to four groups of three or four reviewers, each group reviewing one guideline with the exception of one group that reviewed two guidelines. One independent evaluator reviewed all guidelines. All guidelines effectively addressed only a minority of AGREE domains. Clarity/presentation was effectively addressed in three out of six guidelines, scope/purpose and rigour of development in two guidelines, editorial independence in one guideline, and stakeholder involvement and applicability in none. The clinical management recommendation tended to be similar among guidelines, although interventions addressed varied. Acetaminophen was recommended for initial pain treatment, combined with exercise and education. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were recommended if acetaminophen failed to control pain, but cautiously because of gastrointestinal risks. Surgery was recommended in the presence of persistent pain and disability. Education and activity management interventions were superficially addressed in most guidelines. Guideline creators should use the AGREE criteria when developing guidelines. Innovative and effective methods of knowledge translation to health professionals are needed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.346
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.645
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.806

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3460.645
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.017
Bibliometrics0.0520.029
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0140.009
Open science0.0090.008
Research integrity0.0080.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.812
GPT teacher head0.716
Teacher spread0.096 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
DomainEvaluation
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations83
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Research & TherapySame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207