Analysis of Systematic Reviews in Clinical Practice Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancer

Jaydeep Dhillon; Taimoor Khan; Bilal Siddiqui; Trevor Torgerson; Ryan Ottwell; Austin Johnson; Mason Skinner; Patrick Buchanan; Micah Hartwell; Matt Vassar

doi:10.1002/lary.30051

Analysis of Systematic Reviews in Clinical Practice Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancer

Jaydeep Dhillon, Taimoor Khan, Bilal Siddiqui, Trevor Torgerson, Ryan Ottwell, Austin Johnson, Mason Skinner, Patrick Buchanan, Micah Hartwell, Matt Vassar

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are essential to clinical decision-making as their recommendations are supported by published literature. Systematic reviews are considered the highest quality of evidence used to underpin these guidelines. However, research to support these recommendations may lack compliance to quality reporting among systematic reviews (SRs). Here, we aim to evaluate the quality of SRs underpinning CPG recommendations for the management of head and neck cancer (HNC). Study Design: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis.

Methods: Using PubMed, we searched for CPGs pertinent to the management of head and neck cancer published between January 2017 and May 2021. Relevant guidelines were analyzed for all SRs. Cited SRs in CPGs were evaluated using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) instruments. Study characteristics were extracted in a masked triplicate fashion.

Results: A total of 16 CPGs and 142 unique SRs were included in our study. PRISMA completion ranged from 67.15% to 87.65% across CPGs with a mean of 76.41% (SD = 16.9). AMSTAR-2 completion ranged from 34.38% to 84.38% across CPGs with a mean of 67.55% (SD = 20.9) among all SRs. The lowest rated items included funding sources and publication bias. A higher score was achieved in SR done by Cochrane group and it was only 2.11% (3/142) of all SR's quoted in CPG.

Conclusion: Adherence to AMSTAR-2 and PRISMA items exhibits a variation among SRs cited in CPGs for the management of HNC. The mature underpinning CPG recommendation of SRs cited as supportive evidence could be enhanced in reporting quality.

Level of Evidence: n/a Laryngoscope, 2022.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1976-1983
Number of pages	8
Journal	Laryngoscope
Volume	132
Issue number	10
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.30051
State	Published - Oct 2022

Keywords

AMSTAR-2
Head and neck cancer
PRISMA
clinical practice guidelines
meta-analysis
systematic reviews

Access to Document

10.1002/lary.30051

Cite this

@article{098ff81f770a43e3a87eecf74b5ac357,

title = "Analysis of Systematic Reviews in Clinical Practice Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancer",

abstract = "Objective: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are essential to clinical decision-making as their recommendations are supported by published literature. Systematic reviews are considered the highest quality of evidence used to underpin these guidelines. However, research to support these recommendations may lack compliance to quality reporting among systematic reviews (SRs). Here, we aim to evaluate the quality of SRs underpinning CPG recommendations for the management of head and neck cancer (HNC). Study Design: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis. Methods: Using PubMed, we searched for CPGs pertinent to the management of head and neck cancer published between January 2017 and May 2021. Relevant guidelines were analyzed for all SRs. Cited SRs in CPGs were evaluated using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) instruments. Study characteristics were extracted in a masked triplicate fashion. Results: A total of 16 CPGs and 142 unique SRs were included in our study. PRISMA completion ranged from 67.15% to 87.65% across CPGs with a mean of 76.41% (SD = 16.9). AMSTAR-2 completion ranged from 34.38% to 84.38% across CPGs with a mean of 67.55% (SD = 20.9) among all SRs. The lowest rated items included funding sources and publication bias. A higher score was achieved in SR done by Cochrane group and it was only 2.11% (3/142) of all SR's quoted in CPG. Conclusion: Adherence to AMSTAR-2 and PRISMA items exhibits a variation among SRs cited in CPGs for the management of HNC. The mature underpinning CPG recommendation of SRs cited as supportive evidence could be enhanced in reporting quality. Level of Evidence: n/a Laryngoscope, 2022.",

keywords = "AMSTAR-2, Head and neck cancer, PRISMA, clinical practice guidelines, meta-analysis, systematic reviews",

author = "Jaydeep Dhillon and Taimoor Khan and Bilal Siddiqui and Trevor Torgerson and Ryan Ottwell and Austin Johnson and Mason Skinner and Patrick Buchanan and Micah Hartwell and Matt Vassar",

note = "Funding Information: Dr. Vassar reports receipt of funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, the US Office of Research Integrity, Oklahoma Center for Advancement of Science and Technology, and internal grants from Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences—all outside of the present work. All other authors have no conflict of interest. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.",

year = "2022",

month = oct,

doi = "10.1002/lary.30051",

language = "English",

volume = "132",

pages = "1976--1983",

journal = "Laryngoscope",

issn = "0023-852X",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Analysis of Systematic Reviews in Clinical Practice Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancer

AU - Dhillon, Jaydeep

AU - Khan, Taimoor

AU - Siddiqui, Bilal

AU - Torgerson, Trevor

AU - Ottwell, Ryan

AU - Johnson, Austin

AU - Skinner, Mason

AU - Buchanan, Patrick

AU - Hartwell, Micah

AU - Vassar, Matt

N1 - Funding Information: Dr. Vassar reports receipt of funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, the US Office of Research Integrity, Oklahoma Center for Advancement of Science and Technology, and internal grants from Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences—all outside of the present work. All other authors have no conflict of interest. Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.

PY - 2022/10

Y1 - 2022/10

N2 - Objective: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are essential to clinical decision-making as their recommendations are supported by published literature. Systematic reviews are considered the highest quality of evidence used to underpin these guidelines. However, research to support these recommendations may lack compliance to quality reporting among systematic reviews (SRs). Here, we aim to evaluate the quality of SRs underpinning CPG recommendations for the management of head and neck cancer (HNC). Study Design: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis. Methods: Using PubMed, we searched for CPGs pertinent to the management of head and neck cancer published between January 2017 and May 2021. Relevant guidelines were analyzed for all SRs. Cited SRs in CPGs were evaluated using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) instruments. Study characteristics were extracted in a masked triplicate fashion. Results: A total of 16 CPGs and 142 unique SRs were included in our study. PRISMA completion ranged from 67.15% to 87.65% across CPGs with a mean of 76.41% (SD = 16.9). AMSTAR-2 completion ranged from 34.38% to 84.38% across CPGs with a mean of 67.55% (SD = 20.9) among all SRs. The lowest rated items included funding sources and publication bias. A higher score was achieved in SR done by Cochrane group and it was only 2.11% (3/142) of all SR's quoted in CPG. Conclusion: Adherence to AMSTAR-2 and PRISMA items exhibits a variation among SRs cited in CPGs for the management of HNC. The mature underpinning CPG recommendation of SRs cited as supportive evidence could be enhanced in reporting quality. Level of Evidence: n/a Laryngoscope, 2022.

AB - Objective: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are essential to clinical decision-making as their recommendations are supported by published literature. Systematic reviews are considered the highest quality of evidence used to underpin these guidelines. However, research to support these recommendations may lack compliance to quality reporting among systematic reviews (SRs). Here, we aim to evaluate the quality of SRs underpinning CPG recommendations for the management of head and neck cancer (HNC). Study Design: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis. Methods: Using PubMed, we searched for CPGs pertinent to the management of head and neck cancer published between January 2017 and May 2021. Relevant guidelines were analyzed for all SRs. Cited SRs in CPGs were evaluated using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) instruments. Study characteristics were extracted in a masked triplicate fashion. Results: A total of 16 CPGs and 142 unique SRs were included in our study. PRISMA completion ranged from 67.15% to 87.65% across CPGs with a mean of 76.41% (SD = 16.9). AMSTAR-2 completion ranged from 34.38% to 84.38% across CPGs with a mean of 67.55% (SD = 20.9) among all SRs. The lowest rated items included funding sources and publication bias. A higher score was achieved in SR done by Cochrane group and it was only 2.11% (3/142) of all SR's quoted in CPG. Conclusion: Adherence to AMSTAR-2 and PRISMA items exhibits a variation among SRs cited in CPGs for the management of HNC. The mature underpinning CPG recommendation of SRs cited as supportive evidence could be enhanced in reporting quality. Level of Evidence: n/a Laryngoscope, 2022.

KW - AMSTAR-2

KW - Head and neck cancer

KW - PRISMA

KW - clinical practice guidelines

KW - meta-analysis

KW - systematic reviews

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85124509143&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/lary.30051

DO - 10.1002/lary.30051

M3 - Article

C2 - 35156725

AN - SCOPUS:85124509143

SN - 0023-852X

VL - 132

SP - 1976

EP - 1983

JO - Laryngoscope

JF - Laryngoscope

IS - 10

ER -

Analysis of Systematic Reviews in Clinical Practice Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancer

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this