MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297226946 · doi:10.1111/bju.15902

A systematic review of paediatric neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines and Research Evaluation <scp>(AGREE) II</scp> instrument

2022· review· en· W4297226946 on OpenAlexaff
Priyank Yadav, Abdulrahman Alsabban, Thomas de Los Reyes, Jessica M. Ming, Karen Milford, Stephen Shei-Dei Yang, Jan Michael Silangcruz, Joana Dos Santos, Darius Bägli, Mandy Rickard, Armando J. Lorenzo, Paige Church, Michael Chua

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Urology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalHealth Sciences CentreHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreSickKids Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNiceMedicineInter-rater reliabilityExcellenceIntraclass correlationRigourGuidelineFamily medicineCLARITYPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychometricsRating scalePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine and critique current international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on management of paediatric neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction (NLUTD) and assess the applicability of these guidelines to clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of all CPGs on NLUTD published in English from the year 2010 to 2022. Six reviewers independently used the Appraisal of Guidelines and Research Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument to appraise all eligible CPGs. This instrument is comprised of 23 items organised into six quality domains. The scores for each item and domain were tabulated for each reviewer and interrater reliability was assessed for each domain using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: Six CPGs were appraised and these included: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), European Society for Paediatric Urology, International Children's Continence Society, Irish, Spina Bifida Association (SBA), and International Brazilian Journal of Urology guidelines. They had high mean standardised scores in the domain on 'scope and purpose' and 'clarity of presentation' but had low scores in the domain of 'applicability'. The top three CPGs based on overall score were the NICE, Irish and SBA guidelines and the reviewers had high degree of interrater reliability (ICC 0.912, P < 0.001). The mean scores in various domains for the top three guidelines were 95.8 (scope and purpose), 87.5 (stakeholder involvement), 69.1 (rigour of development), 94.0 (clarity of presentation), 68.4 (applicability), and 59.7 (editorial independence). The diagnostic and treatment recommendations of the top three guidelines were presented. CONCLUSION: The existing CPGs on paediatric NLUTD provide high-quality evidence based recommendations. The NICE, Irish and SBA guidelines were the top three CPGs identified. They scored high on most domains except applicability and editorial independence. These domains need to be considered for future updates to improve the utility.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.184
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.521
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.184
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.477
GPT teacher head0.551
Teacher spread0.073 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of UrologySame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207