Table 4.
Assessment of usability of the β-AGREE II user manual
| Domain | Item | Appropriate,* mean (SD) | Easy to apply,† mean (SD) | Facilitates successful discrimination,‡ mean (SD) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scope and purpose | 1. The overall objective(s) of the guideline is (are) specifically described | 5.87 (1.53) | 5.70 (1.34) | 5.63 (1.45) |
| 2. The clinical question(s) covered by the guideline is (are) specifically described | 5.90 (1.42) | 5.50 (1.46) | 5.60 (1.38) | |
| 3. The patients to whom the guideline is meant to apply are specifically described | 6.07 (1.41) | 5.80 (1.45) | 5.87 (1.50) | |
| Stakeholder involvement | 4. The guideline development group includes individuals from all the relevant professional groups | 6.27 (1.23) | 6.20 (1.27) | 5.97 (1.38) |
| 5. The patients’ views and preferences have been sought | 6.23 (1.25) | 5.87 (1.36) | 6.03 (1.27) | |
| 6. The target users of the guideline are clearly defined | 6.20 (1.22) | 5.87 (1.28) | 5.83 (1.42) | |
| 7. The guideline has been piloted among end users | 6.03 (1.56) | 5.80 (1.49) | 5.67 (1.69) | |
| Rigour of development | 8. Systematic methods were used to search for evidence | 6.40 (1.22) | 6.07 (1.31) | 6.27 (1.26) |
| 9. The criteria for selecting the evidence are clearly described | 6.37 (1.22) | 6.03 (1.27) | 6.13 (1.20) | |
| 10. The methods for formulating the recommendations are clearly described | 5.70 (1.45) | 5.50 (1.46) | 5.67 (1.35) | |
| 11. The health benefits, side effects and risks have been considered in formulating the recommendations | 6.03 (1.30) | 5.70 (1.42) | 6.03 (1.25) | |
| 12. There is an explicit link between the recommendations and the supporting evidence | 5.63 (1.65) | 5.33 (1.69) | 5.67(1.63) | |
| 13. The guideline has been externally reviewed by experts prior to its publication | 6.20 (1.42) | 5.93 (1.44) | 6.17(1.23) | |
| 14. A procedure for updating the guideline is provided | 6.33 (1.18) | 5.93 (1.44) | 6.10 (1.30) | |
| Clarity of presentation | 15. The recommendations are specific and unambiguous | 6.10 (1.24) | 5.60 (1.40) | 5.97 (1.27) |
| 16. The different options for management of the condition are clearly presented | 5.59 (1.72)§ | 5.46 (1.57)§ | 5.61 (1.69)§ | |
| 17. Key recommendations are easily identifiable | 6.13 (1.38) | 6.03 (1.27) | 5.77 (1.43) | |
| 18. The guideline is supported with tools for application | 5.80 (1.63) | 5.77 (1.52) | 5.21 (1.72)§ | |
| Applicability | 19. The potential organizational barriers in applying the recommendations have been discussed | 5.87 (1.33) | 5.40 (1.54) | 5.50 (1.41) |
| 20. The potential cost implications of applying the recommendations have been considered | 5.60 (1.52) | 5.70 (1.37) | 5.60 (1.45) | |
| 21. The guideline presents key review criteria for monitoring and/or audit purposes | 5.43 (1.74) | 5.37 (1.54) | 5.33 (1.69) | |
| Editorial independence | 22. The guideline is editorially independent from the funding body | 6.13 (1.57) | 6.33 (0.84) | 6.20 (1.21) |
| 23. Conflicts of interest of guideline development members have been recorded | 6.43 (1.22) | 6.00 (1.39) | 6.20 (1.21) |
*
The instructions for how to rate this item are appropriate.
†
The instructions for how to rate this item are easy to apply.
‡
The instructions for how to rate this item will facilitate successful discrimination between good and poor reporting in guidelines.
§
The following observations are missing: Item 16: appropriate (3 observations), easy to apply (2 observations), successful discrimination (2 observations). Item 18: successful discrimination (1 observation).