Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

29 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Scientific evidence underlying the American College of Gastroenterology's clinical practice guidelines.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Clinical practice guidelines contain recommendations for physicians to determine the most appropriate care for patients. These guidelines systematically combine scientific evidence and clinical judgment, culminating in recommendations intended to optimize patient care. The recommendations in CPGs are supported by evidence which varies in quality. We aim to survey the clinical practice guidelines created by the American College of Gastroenterology, report the level of evidence supporting their recommendations, and identify areas where evidence can be improved with additional research.

Methods

We extracted 1328 recommendations from 39 clinical practice guidelines published by the American College of Gastroenterology. Several of the clinical practice guidelines used the differing classifications of evidence for their recommendations. To standardize our results, we devised a uniform system for evidence.

Results

A total of 39 clinical practice guidelines were surveyed in our study. Together they account for 1328 recommendations. 693 (52.2%) of the recommendations were based on low evidence, indicating poor evidence or expert opinion. Among individual guidelines, 13/39 (33.3%) had no recommendations based on high evidence.

Conclusion

Very few recommendations made by the American College of Gastroenterology are supported by high levels of evidence. More than half of all recommendations made by the American College of Gastroenterology are based on low-quality evidence or expert opinion.

SUBMITTER: Meyer C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6169920 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Parenteral anticoagulants: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Project description:This article describes the pharmacology of approved parenteral anticoagulants. These include the indirect anticoagulants, unfractionated heparin (UFH), low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs), fondaparinux, and danaparoid, as well as the direct thrombin inhibitors hirudin, bivalirudin, and argatroban. UFH is a heterogeneous mixture of glycosaminoglycans that bind to antithrombin via a unique pentasaccharide sequence and catalyze the inactivation of thrombin, factor Xa, and other clotting enzymes. Heparin also binds to cells and plasma proteins other than antithrombin causing unpredictable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties and triggering nonhemorrhagic side effects, such as heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and osteoporosis. LMWHs have greater inhibitory activity against factor Xa than thrombin and exhibit less binding to cells and plasma proteins than heparin. Consequently, LMWH preparations have more predictable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, have a longer half-life than heparin, and are associated with a lower risk of nonhemorrhagic side effects. LMWHs can be administered once daily or bid by subcutaneous injection, without coagulation monitoring. Based on their greater convenience, LMWHs have replaced UFH for many clinical indications. Fondaparinux, a synthetic pentasaccharide, catalyzes the inhibition of factor Xa, but not thrombin, in an antithrombin-dependent fashion. Fondaparinux binds only to antithrombin. Therefore, fondaparinux-associated HIT or osteoporosis is unlikely to occur. Fondaparinux exhibits complete bioavailability when administered subcutaneously, has a longer half-life than LMWHs, and is given once daily by subcutaneous injection in fixed doses, without coagulation monitoring. Three additional parenteral direct thrombin inhibitors and danaparoid are approved as alternatives to heparin in patients with HIT.

| S-EPMC3278070 | biostudies-other

AASLD clinical practice guidelines: a critical review of scientific evidence and evolving recommendations.

Project description:UnlabelledThe American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) practice guidelines provide recommendations in diagnosing and managing patients with liver disease from available scientific evidence in combination with expert consensus opinions. The aim was to systematically review the evolution of recommendations from AASLD guidelines and identify gaps limiting the evidence-based foundations of these guidelines. Initial and current AASLD guidelines published from January 1998 to August 2012 were reviewed. The AGREE II instrument was used to evaluate rigor and transparency of guideline development. The number of recommendations, distribution of grades (strength or certainty), classes (benefit versus risk), and types of recommendations were evaluated. Whenever possible, multiple versions were evaluated for evolving scientific evidence. A total of 991 recommendations from 28 guidelines on 17 topics were evaluated. From initial to current guidelines, the total number of recommendations increased by 36% (512 to 699). The largest increases were from chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) (+71), liver transplantation (+53), and autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) (+27). Most current recommendations are grade II (44%) and less than 20% are grade I. The AGREE II evaluation showed global improvement in guideline quality. Both HBV and chronic hepatitis C guidelines had greatest increases in grade I recommendations (+383% and +67%, respectively). The greatest increases in treatment recommendations were from HBV (grade I, +1,150%), liver transplantation (grade II, +112%), and AIH (grade III, +105%).ConclusionDespite significant increases in the numbers of recommendations within AASLD practice guidelines over time, only a minority are supported by grade I evidence, highlighting the need for developing well-designed investigations to provide evidence for areas of uncertainty and improving the quality of future guidelines in hepatobiliary diseases.

| S-EPMC4613804 | biostudies-literature

Diagnosis of DVT: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Project description:BackgroundObjective testing for DVT is crucial because clinical assessment alone is unreliable and the consequences of misdiagnosis are serious. This guideline focuses on the identification of optimal strategies for the diagnosis of DVT in ambulatory adults.MethodsThe methods of this guideline follow those described in Methodology for the Development of Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis Guidelines: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.ResultsWe suggest that clinical assessment of pretest probability of DVT, rather than performing the same tests in all patients, should guide the diagnostic process for a first lower extremity DVT (Grade 2B). In patients with a low pretest probability of first lower extremity DVT, we recommend initial testing with D-dimer or ultrasound (US) of the proximal veins over no diagnostic testing (Grade 1B), venography (Grade 1B), or whole-leg US (Grade 2B). In patients with moderate pretest probability, we recommend initial testing with a highly sensitive D-dimer, proximal compression US, or whole-leg US rather than no testing (Grade 1B) or venography (Grade 1B). In patients with a high pretest probability, we recommend proximal compression or whole-leg US over no testing (Grade 1B) or venography (Grade 1B).ConclusionsFavored strategies for diagnosis of first DVT combine use of pretest probability assessment, D-dimer, and US. There is lower-quality evidence available to guide diagnosis of recurrent DVT, upper extremity DVT, and DVT during pregnancy.

| S-EPMC3278048 | biostudies-literature

Oral anticoagulant therapy: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Project description:The objective of this article is to summarize the published literature concerning the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral anticoagulant drugs that are currently available for clinical use and other aspects related to their management.We carried out a standard review of published articles focusing on the laboratory and clinical characteristics of the vitamin K antagonists; the direct thrombin inhibitor, dabigatran etexilate; and the direct factor Xa inhibitor, rivaroxabanThe antithrombotic effect of each oral anticoagulant drug, the interactions, and the monitoring of anticoagulation intensity are described in detail and discussed without providing specific recommendations. Moreover, we describe and discuss the clinical applications and optimal dosages of oral anticoagulant therapies, practical issues related to their initiation and monitoring, adverse events such as bleeding and other potential side effects, and available strategies for reversal.There is a large amount of evidence on laboratory and clinical characteristics of vitamin K antagonists. A growing body of evidence is becoming available on the first new oral anticoagulant drugs available for clinical use, dabigatran and rivaroxaban.

| S-EPMC3278051 | biostudies-literature

New antithrombotic drugs: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Project description:This article focuses on new antithrombotic drugs that are in or are entering phase 3 clinical testing. Development of these new agents was prompted by the limitations of existing antiplatelet, anticoagulant, or fibrinolytic drugs. Addressing these unmet needs, this article (1) outlines the rationale for development of new antithrombotic agents; (2) describes the new antiplatelet, anticoagulant, and fibrinolytic drugs; and (3) provides clinical perspectives on the opportunities and challenges faced by these novel agents.

| S-EPMC3278067 | biostudies-other

Evidence-based management of anticoagulant therapy: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Project description:High-quality anticoagulation management is required to keep these narrow therapeutic index medications as effective and safe as possible. This article focuses on the common important management questions for which, at a minimum, low-quality published evidence is available to guide best practices.The methods of this guideline follow those described in Methodology for the Development of Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis Guidelines: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines in this supplement.Most practical clinical questions regarding the management of anticoagulation, both oral and parenteral, have not been adequately addressed by randomized trials. We found sufficient evidence for summaries of recommendations for 23 questions, of which only two are strong rather than weak recommendations. Strong recommendations include targeting an international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.0 for patients on vitamin K antagonist therapy (Grade 1B) and not routinely using pharmacogenetic testing for guiding doses of vitamin K antagonist (Grade 1B). Weak recommendations deal with such issues as loading doses, initiation overlap, monitoring frequency, vitamin K supplementation, patient self-management, weight and renal function adjustment of doses, dosing decision support, drug interactions to avoid, and prevention and management of bleeding complications. We also address anticoagulation management services and intensive patient education.We offer guidance for many common anticoagulation-related management problems. Most anticoagulation management questions have not been adequately studied.

| S-EPMC3278055 | biostudies-literature

Chemoprevention of lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.

Project description:BackgroundLung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death in men and women in the United States. Cigarette smoking is the main risk factor. Former smokers are at a substantially increased risk of developing lung cancer compared with lifetime never smokers. Chemoprevention refers to the use of specific agents to reverse, suppress, or prevent the process of carcinogenesis. This article reviews the major agents that have been studied for chemoprevention.MethodsArticles of primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention trials were reviewed and summarized to obtain recommendations.ResultsNone of the phase 3 trials with the agents ?-carotene, retinol, 13-cis-retinoic acid, ?-tocopherol, N-acetylcysteine, acetylsalicylic acid, or selenium has demonstrated beneficial and reproducible results. To facilitate the evaluation of promising agents and to lessen the need for a large sample size, extensive time commitment, and expense, surrogate end point biomarker trials are being conducted to assist in identifying the most promising agents for later-stage chemoprevention trials. With the understanding of important cellular signaling pathways and the expansion of potentially important targets, agents (many of which target inflammation and the arachidonic acid pathway) are being developed and tested which may prevent or reverse lung carcinogenesis.ConclusionsBy integrating biologic knowledge, additional early-phase trials can be performed in a reasonable time frame. The future of lung cancer chemoprevention should entail the evaluation of single agents or combinations that target various pathways while working toward identification and validation of intermediate end points.

| S-EPMC3749715 | biostudies-literature

Screening for lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.

Project description:BackgroundLung cancer is by far the major cause of cancer deaths largely because in the majority of patients it is at an advanced stage at the time it is discovered, when curative treatment is no longer feasible. This article examines the data regarding the ability of screening to decrease the number of lung cancer deaths.MethodsA systematic review was conducted of controlled studies that address the effectiveness of methods of screening for lung cancer.ResultsSeveral large randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including a recent one, have demonstrated that screening for lung cancer using a chest radiograph does not reduce the number of deaths from lung cancer. One large RCT involving low-dose CT (LDCT) screening demonstrated a significant reduction in lung cancer deaths, with few harms to individuals at elevated risk when done in the context of a structured program of selection, screening, evaluation, and management of the relatively high number of benign abnormalities. Whether other RCTs involving LDCT screening are consistent is unclear because data are limited or not yet mature.ConclusionsScreening is a complex interplay of selection (a population with sufficient risk and few serious comorbidities), the value of the screening test, the interval between screening tests, the availability of effective treatment, the risk of complications or harms as a result of screening, and the degree with which the screened individuals comply with screening and treatment recommendations. Screening with LDCT of appropriate individuals in the context of a structured process is associated with a significant reduction in the number of lung cancer deaths in the screened population. Given the complex interplay of factors inherent in screening, many questions remain on how to effectively implement screening on a broader scale.

| S-EPMC3749713 | biostudies-literature

Epidemiology of lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.

Project description:BackgroundEver since a lung cancer epidemic emerged in the mid-1900 s, the epidemiology of lung cancer has been intensively investigated to characterize its causes and patterns of occurrence. This report summarizes the key findings of this research.MethodsA detailed literature search provided the basis for a narrative review, identifying and summarizing key reports on population patterns and factors that affect lung cancer risk.ResultsEstablished environmental risk factors for lung cancer include smoking cigarettes and other tobacco products and exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke, occupational lung carcinogens, radiation, and indoor and outdoor air pollution. Cigarette smoking is the predominant cause of lung cancer and the leading worldwide cause of cancer death. Smoking prevalence in developing nations has increased, starting new lung cancer epidemics in these nations. A positive family history and acquired lung disease are examples of host factors that are clinically useful risk indicators. Risk prediction models based on lung cancer risk factors have been developed, but further refinement is needed to provide clinically useful risk stratification. Promising biomarkers of lung cancer risk and early detection have been identified, but none are ready for broad clinical application.ConclusionsAlmost all lung cancer deaths are caused by cigarette smoking, underscoring the need for ongoing efforts at tobacco control throughout the world. Further research is needed into the reasons underlying lung cancer disparities, the causes of lung cancer in never smokers, the potential role of HIV in lung carcinogenesis, and the development of biomarkers.

| S-EPMC4694610 | biostudies-literature

Antithrombotic therapy for VTE disease: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Project description:This article addresses the treatment of VTE disease.We generated strong (Grade 1) and weak (Grade 2) recommendations based on high-quality (Grade A), moderate-quality (Grade B), and low-quality (Grade C) evidence.For acute DVT or pulmonary embolism (PE), we recommend initial parenteral anticoagulant therapy (Grade 1B) or anticoagulation with rivaroxaban. We suggest low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or fondaparinux over IV unfractionated heparin (Grade 2C) or subcutaneous unfractionated heparin (Grade 2B). We suggest thrombolytic therapy for PE with hypotension (Grade 2C). For proximal DVT or PE, we recommend treatment of 3 months over shorter periods (Grade 1B). For a first proximal DVT or PE that is provoked by surgery or by a nonsurgical transient risk factor, we recommend 3 months of therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if provoked by a nonsurgical risk factor and low or moderate bleeding risk); that is unprovoked, we suggest extended therapy if bleeding risk is low or moderate (Grade 2B) and recommend 3 months of therapy if bleeding risk is high (Grade 1B); and that is associated with active cancer, we recommend extended therapy (Grade 1B; Grade 2B if high bleeding risk) and suggest LMWH over vitamin K antagonists (Grade 2B). We suggest vitamin K antagonists or LMWH over dabigatran or rivaroxaban (Grade 2B). We suggest compression stockings to prevent the postthrombotic syndrome (Grade 2B). For extensive superficial vein thrombosis, we suggest prophylactic-dose fondaparinux or LMWH over no anticoagulation (Grade 2B), and suggest fondaparinux over LMWH (Grade 2C).Strong recommendations apply to most patients, whereas weak recommendations are sensitive to differences among patients, including their preferences.

| S-EPMC3278049 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data