COVID-19 Clinical Guideline Quality Scores Evaluated with AGREE II

20 clinical practice guidelines for COVID-19 were evaluated for methodological quality using the AGREE II instrument. The assessment, conducted by researchers from Sichuan University, analyzed guidelines published between December 2019 and March 2020. Median scores across six domains ranged from 0% to 56.9%, with only three guidelines deemed recommendable.

Use Cases

• Benchmarking the methodological quality of COVID-19 clinical guidelines based on AGREE II domain scores.
• Identifying common weaknesses in guideline development, such as stakeholder involvement and rigour of development, using the provided median scores.
• Training machine learning models to predict guideline quality scores from textual features of guideline documents.
• Analyzing the correlation between guideline publication source and quality scores across the six AGREE II domains.

Strengths

• Provides quantitative scores for 20 distinct clinical guidelines across six standardized AGREE II domains.
• Evaluation conducted by four independent assessors, which likely increases scoring reliability.
• Includes specific median scores and ranges (e.g., 0% to 91.7% for rigour of development) for detailed analysis.

Limitations

• Row count is unknown, which may limit suitability assessment.
• Column-level documentation is absent; field semantics must be inferred after download.
• Data may reflect temporal bias inherent to paperswithcode, covering only the initial pandemic period (Dec 2019-Mar 2020).

Provenance

Source

Sichuan University

Collection Method

Guidelines were identified by searching seven databases and government organization websites, with quality assessed independently by four reviewers using the AGREE II instrument.

Time Range

December 2019 to March 2020