Table 1 Quality assessments of IWGDF guideline to adopt or adapt; using a customised AGREE II instrument*

 1

The overall objective(s) of the guideline is (are) specifically described

6

7

6

6

25

89%

High

 2

The health question(s) covered by the guideline is (are) specifically described

6

6

7

7

26

93%

High

 3

The population (patients, public, etc.) to whom the guideline is meant to apply is specifically described.

6

6

7

7

26

93%

High

Domain Score (sum of 3 items)

18

19

20

20

77

92%

High

 4

The guideline development group includes individuals from all relevant professional groups.

5

6

5

4

20

71%

High

 5

The views and preferences of the target population (patients, public, etc.) have been sought.

3

2

1

2

8

29%

Low

 6

The target users of the guideline are clearly defined.

5

5

7

6

23

82%

High

Domain Score (sum of 3 applicable items)

13

13

13

12

51

61%

Moderate

 7

Systematic methods were used to search for evidence.

7

7

7

7

28

100%

High

 8

The criteria for selecting the evidence are clearly described.

7

7

7

7

28

100%

High

 9

The strengths and limitations of the body of evidence are clearly described.

6

7

7

6

26

93%

High

 10

The methods for formulating the recommendations are clearly described.

6

6

6

6

24

86%

High

 11

The health benefits, side effects, and risks have been considered in formulating the recommendations.

5

7

7

6

25

89%

High

 12

There is an explicit link between the recommendations and the supporting evidence.

5

6

7

6

24

86%

High

 13

The guideline has been externally reviewed by experts prior to its publication.

5

5

4

5

19

68%

Moderate

 14

A procedure for updating the guideline is provided.

5

6

5

6

22

79%

High

Domain Score (sum of 8 items)

46

51

50

49

196

88%

High

 15

The recommendations are specific and unambiguous.

6

6

7

7

26

93%

High

 16

The different options for management of the condition or health issue are clearly presented.

6

6

7

6

25

89%

High

 17

Key recommendations are easily identifiable.

7

7

7

7

28

100%

High

Domain Score (sum of 3 items)

19

19

21

20

79

94%

High

 18

The guideline describes facilitators and barriers to its application.

5

5

4

5

19

68%

Moderate

 19

The guideline provides advice and/or tools on how the recommendations can be put into practice.

5

7

3

4

19

68%

Moderate

 20

The potential resource implications of applying the recommendations have been considered.

5

5

2

4

16

57%

Moderate

 21

The guideline presents monitoring and/or auditing criteria.

4

6

1

5

16

57%

Moderate

Domain Score (sum of 4 items)

19

23

10

18

70

63%

Moderate

 22

The views of the funding body have not influenced the content of the guideline.

7

7

7

7

28

100%

High

 23

Competing interests of guideline development group members have been recorded and addressed.

6

7

7

6

26

93%

High

Domain Score (sum of 2 items)

13

14

14

13

54

96%

High

Rate the overall quality of this guideline

6

6

6

6

24

86%

High

I would recommend this guideline for use.

Yes

Yes,with modifications

Yes

Yes

Total Guideline Score (sum of all 23 individual items)

128

139

128

132

527

82%

High

Total Guideline Score %

80%

86%

80%

82%

Total Guideline Quality Category

High

High

High

High