Skip to main content
. 2021 Feb 15;13(2):624. doi: 10.3390/nu13020624

Table 2.

Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II results for clinical practice guidelines.

Domains Clinical Practice Guidelines
ASPEN
[16]
DAA
[17]
DGEM
[18]
EBPG
[19]
EDTNA-ERCA
[20]
ESPEN
(EN)
[21]
ESPEN
(PN)
[22]
GARIN
[23]
KDOQI
[24]
SIN-ANDID-ANED
[25]
The Renal Association
[26]
1. SCOPE AND PURPOSE 34.7 88.9 88.9 0.00 62.5 77.8 81.9 86.1 88.9 55.6 5.6
a. Overall objectives 75.0 85.7 82.1 14.3 75.0 71.4 89.3 89.3 89.3 60.7 25.0
b. Health questions 17.9 96.4 89.3 14.3 53.6 85.7 89.3 89.3 100 67.9 14.3
c. Population to apply 39.3 89.3 100 14.3 75.0 85.7 75.0 89.3 92.0 57.1 17.9
2. STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT 62.5 63.9 44.4 16.7 34.7 36.1 12.5 15.3 51.4 43.1 18.1
a. Guideline development group 85.7 75.0 64.3 53.6 32.1 53.6 42.9 39.3 100 71.4 32.1
b. Views and preferences of target population 28.6 71.4 14.3 17.9 32.1 14.3 14.3 14.5 17.9 53.6 14.3
c. Users of guidelines 89.3 60.7 78.6 14.3 67.9 67.9 17.9 28.6 57.1 28.6 42.9
3. RIGOR OF DEVELOPMENT 31.3 30.2 48.9 21.9 13.0 36.5 18.2 47.4 72.4 3.6 33.3
a. Research methodology 32.1 32.1 82.1 14.3 14.3 17.9 14.3 50.0 96.4 14.3 60.7
b. Selecting criteria 14.3 17.9 14.2 14.3 14.3 14.3 17.9 75.0 100 14.3 14.3
c. Strengths and limitations of evidence 14.3 14.3 14.3 28.6 14.3 14.3 17.9 85.7 85.7 14.3 42.9
d. Formulating methods 46.4 42.9 50.0 14.3 17.9 39.3 25.0 32.1 82.1 14.3 53.6
e. Health benefits, side effects and risks stated in recommendations 75.0 14.3 92.9 82.1 67.9 75.0 75.0 57.1 32.1 25.0 25.0
f. Explicit link of recommendations 89.3 82.1 92.9 82.1 46.4 96.4 60.7 96.4 100 28.6 71.4
g. Review of guideline 42.9 57.1 14.3 14.3 14.3 28.6 14.3 28.6 100 14.3 60.7
h. Updating procedure 14.3 60.7 89.3 14.3 14.3 78.6 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3
4. CLARITY OF PRESENTATION 52.8 84.7 100 86.1 91.7 94.4 91.7 94.4 98.6 33.3 68.1
a. Specific and unambiguous recommendations 67.9 83.3 100 89.3 96.4 89.3 100 96.4 100 46.4 85.7
b. Different options for management 14.3 92.9 100 75.0 85.7 96.4 96.4 89.3 96.4 25.0 60.7
c. Identifiable key recommendations 96.4 96.4 100 100 96.4 100 82.1 100 100 57.1 71.4
5. APPLICABILITY 0.0 11.5 12.5 27.1 36.5 4.2 33.3 25.0 62.5 0.0 0.0
a. facilitators and barriers of application 14.3 14.3 14.3 17.9 32.1 14.3 14.2 14.3 28.6 14.3 14.3
b. guideline implementation advice and tools 14.3 21.4 14.3 60.7 67.9 14.3 67.9 57.1 96.4 14.3 14.3
c. Resource implications 14.3 21.4 14.3 28.5 28.6 14.3 14.3 17.9 57.1 14.3 14.3
d. Monitoring and/or auditing criteria 14.3 39.3 57.1 42.9 53.6 28.6 75.0 53.6 89.3 14.3 14.3
6. EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE 35.4 100 47.9 0.00 36.5 95.8 6.3 39.6 91.7 50.0 47.9
a. Views of funding body 75.0 100 21.4 14.3 17.9 96.4 14.3 82.1 85.7 42.9 14.3
b. Conflicts of interests 14.3 100 89.3 14.3 17.9 96.4 25.0 14.3 100 71.4 96.4
OVERALL QUALITY Low Moderate Low Low Low Moderate Low Low Moderate Low Low
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommended
With modifications X X X
Not recommended X X X X X X X X

All results are presented as percentage scores. Total score of each domain and the highest score of each category are presented in bold font. EN: Enteral nutrition; PN: Parenteral nutrition. AoND: Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, ASPEN: American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, DAA: Dietitians Association of Australia, DGEM: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ernährungsmedizin-German Society for Nutritional Medicine, EBPG: European Best Practice Guidelines, EDTNA-ERCA: European Dialysis and Transplantation Nurses Association/European Renal Care Association, ESPEN: European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism, KDOQI: Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative, GARIN: Andalusian Group for Nutrition Reflection and Investigation.