An Analysis of the Evidence Underpinning the American Urologic Association Clinical Practice Guidelines

Ref ID 792
First Author A.M. Pena
Journal UROLOGY
Year Of Publishing 2022
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009042952101195X?casa_token=PzQJT1_eghAAAAAA:cK5UFePGWiNw2mJHtHKvR3uNm8Iy4bJhMPeSVQe_QKYEQhB_HWmiVP3LcObny7xPw-2uB6dbDOk#sec0001
Keywords Cochrane
Low reporting quality
Non-Cochrane reviews
Low methodological quality
Problem(s) Cochrane reviews more rigorous/higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews
Low reporting (PRISMA) quality
Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
Number of systematic reviews included 120
Summary of Findings From 120 included systematic reviews underpinning 30 American Urologic Association clinical practice guidelines from 2015–2021. Mean percent adherence to PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 was 65.4% –d 55.2% respectively. Systematic reviews conducted by the Cochrane Collaboration scored higher on AMSTAR-2 compared to non-Cochrane (z = -4.41, P <.01) and a positive correlation between PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 scores (r = 0.56, P <.001) was determined.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? Yes