Skip Navigation



Annals of Oncology Advance Access published online on February 6, 2006
Annals of Oncology, doi:10.1093/annonc/mdl003
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
17/4/691    most recent
mdl003v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vigna-Taglianti, F.
Right arrow Articles by Faggiano, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vigna-Taglianti, F.
Right arrow Articles by Faggiano, F.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2006 European Society for Medical Oncology
Received August 30, 2005
Revised December 20, 2005
Accepted December 22, 2005

original article

Quality of systematic reviews used in guidelines for oncology practice

F. Vigna-Taglianti 1 *, P. Vineis 2, A. Liberati 3, and F. Faggiano 4

1 Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology, University of Torino, Torino, Italy; Department of Medical Sciences, Avogadro University, Novara, Italy
2 Department of Biomedical Sciences and Human Oncology, University of Torino, Torino, Italy; Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Imperial College, London, UK
3 University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
4 Department of Medical Sciences, Avogadro University, Novara, Italy

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
F. Vigna-Taglianti, E-mail: federica.vignataglianti{at}oed.piemonte.it


  Abstract

Background: Systematic reviews are an important tool for developing clinical recommendations. Those of high quality assure a good level of confidence on the strength of the recommendations.

Methods: A QUOROM-based checklist was applied to the reviews cited in a sample of guidelines on breast and colon cancer prevention and therapy. The checklist provided a weight for each criterion and a total quality score. Each review was independently evaluated by two reviewers; disagreements were solved by consensus.

Results: Eighty reviews (96%) were retrieved and evaluated; 36 focused on breast, and 44 on colorectal cancer. Twenty-three reviews (29%) did not match the definition of systematic review. In 17 (21%) the searching methods were unclear or described elsewhere. Forty (50%) were systematic. Not systematic, low and very low quality reviews accounted for 70% of the total. No review obtained the A+ class score; only 5 (6%) the A- and 7 (9%) the B+.

Conclusions: The results of this assessment provide a sober picture of the quality of the sources used to build guidelines. Oncologists should be aware that they could be relying on poor underlying documents. Writing groups should be aware of methodological problems, and should consult the existing manuals for the preparation of guidelines.

Keywords: breast cancer; colorectal cancer; evidence-based medicine; guidelines; quality assessment; reviews.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Ann OncolHome page
G. Pentheroudakis, R. Stahel, H. Hansen, and N. Pavlidis
Heterogeneity in cancer guidelines: should we eradicate or tolerate?
Ann. Onc., December 1, 2008; 19(12): 2067 - 2078.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CJASNHome page
M. Mrkobrada, H. Thiessen-Philbrook, R. B. Haynes, A. V. Iansavichus, F. Rehman, and A. X. Garg
Need for Quality Improvement in Renal Systematic Reviews
Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., July 1, 2008; 3(4): 1102 - 1114.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JCOHome page
G. H. Lyman, A. A. Khorana, A. Falanga, D. Clarke-Pearson, C. Flowers, M. Jahanzeb, A. Kakkar, N. M. Kuderer, M. N. Levine, H. Liebman, et al.
American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline: Recommendations for Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis and Treatment in Patients With Cancer
J. Clin. Oncol., December 1, 2007; 25(34): 5490 - 5505.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann OncolHome page
N. Pavlidis, H. Hansen, and R. Stahel
ESMO clinical recommendations: a practical guide for medical oncologists
Ann. Onc., November 1, 2007; 18(11): 1759 - 1763.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.