引用本文:何伟民,黄景文,罗韶金,潘 伟.AGREE Ⅱ Shaneyfelt及Grilli三个指南评价工具间相关性的研究[J].中国临床新医学,2017,10(8):757-762.
【打印本页】   【下载PDF全文】   查看/发表评论  【EndNote】   【RefMan】   【BibTex】
←前一篇|后一篇→ 过刊浏览    高级检索
本文已被:浏览 34次   下载 34 本文二维码信息
码上扫一扫!
分享到: 微信 更多
AGREE Ⅱ Shaneyfelt及Grilli三个指南评价工具间相关性的研究
何伟民,黄景文,罗韶金,潘 伟
528200 佛山,南方医科大学附属南海医院心血管内科
摘要:
[摘要] 目的 研究三个指南评价工具(AGREE Ⅱ、Shaneyfelt及Grilli)之间的相关性,为临床医生评价及选择指南提供更好的途径。方法 搜索从2000~2014年以中文或英文发表的慢性心力衰竭指南,分别使用这三个工具进行评价并计算分数,通过计算相关+系数来分析他们之间的相关性。使用AGREE Ⅱ对这些指南进行推荐等级划分,并依此为Shaneyfelt和Grilli设立相应的划分标准。结果 AGREE Ⅱ和Shaneyfelt的相关系数r1=0.908,AGREE Ⅱ和Grilli的相关系数r2=0.812,Shaneyfelt和Grilli的相关系数r3=0.784,各r值的显著性水平均为0.01。AGREE Ⅱ综合推荐评价为“推荐”、“推荐(修订后)”和“不推荐”的指南,在Shaneyfelt和Grilli的得分分别是(18.90±2.30)分和(2.50±0.50)分,(14.20±1.20)分和(1.70±0.60)分,(10.67±2.11)分和(0.65±0.45)分。结论 (1)三个指南评价工具间相关性显著。(2)以Shaneyfelt评分,≥16分考虑为“推荐”,13~15分考虑为“推荐(修订后)”,≤12分考虑为“不推荐”;以Grilli评分,≥2分考虑为“可能推荐”,≤1分考虑为“可能不推荐”。
关键词:  指南评价工具  AGREE Ⅱ  Shaneyfelt  Grilli  相关性
DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-3806.2017.08.13
分类号:R-058
基金项目:
Study on the correlation among three guideline appraisal tools: AGREE Ⅱ, Shaneyfelt and Grilli
HE Wei-min, HUANG Jing-wen, LUO Shao-jin, et al.
Study on the correlation among three guideline appraisal tools: AGREE Ⅱ, Shaneyfelt and Grilli
Abstract:
[Abstract] Objective To study the correlation among the three appraisal tools(AGREE Ⅱ, Shaneyfelt and Grilli) and to provide a better way for clinicians to appraise and choose clinical guidelines.Methods The three tools were used to appraise the guidelines for chronic heart failure published in Journals in English or Chinese from 2000 to 2014, and the scores of each guideline were recorded by each tool and their correlation was analyzed. The recommendation of the guideline was assessed by AGREE Ⅱ and the appraisal criterions of Shaneyfelt and Grilli were established.Results r1(AGREE Ⅱ and Shaneyfelt)=0.908, r2(AGREE Ⅱ and Grilli)=0.812, r3(Shaneyfelt and Grilli)=0.784, and all the r values were significant at 0.01 level. The mean scores of guidelines assessed by AGREE Ⅱ as “recommend”, “recommend(after revised)” and “would not recommend” in Shaneyfelt were(18.90±2.30), (14.20±1.20) and (10.67±2.11) respectively, while those in Grilli were (2.50±0.50), (1.70±0.60) and (0.65±0.45) respectively.Conclusion (1)There is significant correlation among the three tools.(2)From the appraisal criterions of Shaneyfelt, it was considered as “recommend” if score≥16, as “recommend(after revised)” if 13~15, and as “would not recommend” if ≤12; From the appraisal criterions of Griili, it was considered as “recommend” if score≥2, while as “would not recommend” if ≤1.
Key words:  Appraisal tool for guidelines  AGREE Ⅱ  Shaneyfelt  Grilli  Correlation