From: A critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of lower-limb osteoarthritis
 |  | Rating of guidelines [reference] | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AGREE instrument used for rating | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | |
 |  | Canadian Consensus | North of | ADMMC OA |  |  |  |
Domain | Item | Conference[11] | EULAR [6] | ||||
Scope and purpose | |||||||
 | 1. Overall objective(s) | + | + | + | + | + | + |
 | 2. Clinical question(s) | + | + | + | + | + | -b |
 | 3. Target patient population | + | + | + | + | + | + |
Stakeholder involvement | |||||||
 | 4. Development group representative | +b | + | + | + | - | - |
 | 5. Patient views and preferences | + | - | -b | - | - | + |
Rigour of development | |||||||
 | 6. Systematic evidence search | - | + | -b | - | + | - |
 | 7. Selection of evidence explicit | - | + | - | - | + | - |
 | 8. Formulation of recommendations explicit | - | + | + | - | + | - |
 | 9. Benefits, side effects, and risks described | + | + | + | +b | + | + |
 | 10. Explicit link between evidence and recommendations | +b | + | + | + | + | + |
 | 11. External review | + | + | + | -b | - | - |
 | 12. Procedure for updating guideline | + | + | - | + | + | + |
Clarity and presentation | |||||||
 | 13. Specific and unambiguous recommendations | + | + | + | + | + | +b |
 | 14. Different treatment options | + | + | + | + | + | + |
 | 15. Key recommendations easily identified | -b | + | + | +b | + | +b |
Applicability | |||||||
 | 16. End users of guideline stated | + | + | + | + | -b | - |
 | 17. Barriers to implementation are discussed | - | - | -b | + | - | - |
 | 18. Cost implications are discussed | - | + | - | - | - | + |
 | 19. Tools for application | - | - | -b | + | - | - |
 | 20. Review/monitoring criteria defined | - | - | - | + | - | - |
 | 21. Pilot testing | - | - | + | + | - | + |
Editorial independence | |||||||
 | 22. Editorial independent from funding body | - | - | - | - | - | - |
 | 23. Conflicts of interest are stated | - | + | - | - | - | + |