Discrepancies in breast cancer guideline recommendations despite similar Cochrane systematic review conclusions

Author:

Zhang Zhigang123,Cheng Jie24,Hou Jialu4,Niu Mingming23,Gao Ya2ORCID,Xu Jianguo2,Zheng Qingyong23ORCID,Ji Kexin13,Zhang Min4,Hao Tian13,Li Ning4,Han Xinyi13,Ma Xiujuan13,Kong Jiajia13,Wang Rui13,Zhao Ye56,Tian Jinhui2ORCID,Hu Xiaofang4

Affiliation:

1. Intensive Care Units Lanzhou University First Affiliated Hospital Lanzhou China

2. Evidence‐Based Medicine Center School of Basic Medical Sciences Lanzhou University Lanzhou China

3. School of Nursing Lanzhou University Lanzhou China

4. Nursing Department Changzhi People's Hospital Changzhi China

5. Departments of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center Indiana University School of Medicine Indianapolis Indiana USA

6. First Clinical Medical College Lanzhou University Lanzhou China

Abstract

AbstractAimThis study aims to describe the citation patterns of Cochrane systematic reviews (CSR) in guidelines for managing breast cancer.MethodsWe searched for systematic reviews on breast cancer in The Cochrane Library from the date of inception to November 15, 2023, and identified guidelines that cited them. We described how systematic reviews were cited by the guidelines in each database and each year. Additionally, we presented the relationships between the conclusions of the systematic reviews and guideline recommendations and compared the consistency of the recommendations on the same topic across different guidelines.ResultsA total of 64 systematic reviews and 228 guidelines were included in this study. The average number of the 64 systematic reviews cited by the guidelines was 5.91. We found that the guideline recommendations were irrelevant or inconsistent with the conclusions of the systematic reviews in 56 (38.36%) cited entries. We grouped recommendations on the same topic across different guidelines into one group, of which only 5 groups (15.15%) had completely consistent recommendations, and the other 28 groups (84.85%) had inconsistent recommendations.ConclusionThe average number of citations for CSR on breast cancer in the guidelines was 5.91. There were also situations in which the guideline recommendations were inconsistent with the conclusions of the included systematic reviews, and recommendations on the same topic across different guidelines were inconsistent.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3