Assessment of the quality and content of clinical practice guidelines for vitamin D and for immigrants using the AGREE II instrument: global systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Worldwide, more immigrants experience vitamin D (vitD) deficiency than non-immigrants. Recommendations in current clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) concerning vitD are inadequate to address vitD deficiency among immigrants, and there are concerns regarding the quality of guidance in these CPGs. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify and evaluate the quality of published CPGs addressing vitD and immigrants' health using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II (AGREE II) tool and clarify the recommendations pertaining to vitD and immigrant populations in these CPGs. METHODS: We performed a systematic search to identify the most recent CPGs across various databases (Ovid MEDLINE ALL, Embase and Turning Research Into Practice), guideline repositories and grey literature. Two reviewers independently conducted study selection and data abstraction and evaluated the quality of the included guidelines using the AGREE II tool. RESULTS: We identified 25 relevant CPGs; 21 focused on vitD and 4 covered immigrants' health. Around one-quarter of the included CPGs were high quality (≥60% in at least four of the six domains, including 'rigour of development'). The highest mean scores among the six AGREE II domains were for 'clarity of presentation' and 'scope and purpose'. About 4.8% (1/21) of the CPGs on vitD had immigrant-related recommendations. VitD recommendations were emphasised in one out of the four immigrant health CPGs (25%). CPGs covering immigrants' health and vitD were inadequately systematically appraised. Moreover, recommendations regarding vitD were insufficient to address the growing epidemic of vitD deficiency among immigrant populations. CONCLUSION: The insufficient recommendations for vitD fail to address the rising vitD deficiency among immigrants, highlighting a critical gap in healthcare provisions. Urgent national and international efforts are needed to develop comprehensive CPGs, bridging research, policy and practice disparities. Future guidelines must prioritise routine vitD screening, supplementation protocols for vulnerable immigrant groups, and culturally appropriate interventions to improve health outcomes for immigrants globally. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021240562.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.107 | 0.399 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.028 | 0.027 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".