Cited by 9Clinical practice guidelines implementationPelvic floor disorders treatmentsDelphi Technique in Research

Systematic review and appraisal of clinical practice guidelines on pelvic organ prolapse using the AGREE II tool

Tsiapakidou, Sofia, Nygaard, Christiana Campani, Falconi, Gabriele, Pape, Janna, Betschart, Cornelia, Doumouchtsis, Stergios K, CHORUS: An International Collaboration for Harmonising Outcomes, Research and Standards in Urogynaecology and Women's Health (i-chorus.org)·2021·Neurourology and Urodynamics

Abstract

Aims: To systematically evaluate the content and quality of national and international clinical guidelines on pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Methods: We searched medical databases and organizations websites, to identify national and international guidelines on diagnosis and management of POP. Five authors independently assessed guidelines using the validated AGREE II tool. Its six domains include (1) scope and purpose, (2) stakeholder involvement, (3) rigor of development, (4) clarity of presentation, (5) applicability, and (6) editorial independence. Results: Eight guidelines met the inclusion criteria. Three hundred and thirteen different recommendations were identified. One hundred and ninety‐nine recommendations were comparable across guidelines. Thirty‐one recommendations were not supported by research evidence. Assessment by history and physical examination using the POP quantification system and consideration of imaging were recommendations featuring in all guidelines. Conservative treatment recommendations namely pelvic floor muscle training and vaginal pessaries were also found in all guidelines. Regarding surgical management, patient counseling, treating only symptomatic POP, consideration of apical fixation during surgical treatment, and use of biological or synthetic implants in recurrent cases were recommendations in all guidelines. Overall, the highest median scores were in the domains “scope and purpose” and “rigor of development”. The lowest median score was for applicability (28.3%). Although the median score of “editorial independence” was high (85.4%), variability was also substantial (interquartile range: 12.5–100). Conclusion: We identified variations in quality and deficiencies in certain areas, especially “applicability” and “editorial independence.” Improvements in these key domains may enhance the quality and clinical impact of clinical practice guidelines.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/nau.24709

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 37 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tsiapakidou, S., Nygaard, C. C., Falconi, G., Pape, J., Betschart, C., Doumouchtsis, S. K., & CHORUS: An International Collaboration for Harmonising Outcomes, R. A. S. I. U. A. W. H. (.-C. O.
Affiliations
  • Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (GR)
  • St Helier Hospital (GB)
  • Ospedale San Bortolo (IT)
  • University Hospital Zurich (CH)
  • St George's, University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Tsiapakidou, Sofia
Venue
Neurourology and Urodynamics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-06-08
Volume
40
Issue
6
Pages
1402-1413
ISSN
  • 0733-2467 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6777
OpenAlex
W3168770295
Cited by
9
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2021: 1
FWCI
0.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neurourology and Urodynamics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
Keywords
pelvic organ prolapse, guideline quality, AGREE II, guideline development rigor, applicability, editorial independence, pelvic floor muscle training, pessary
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Databases, Factual, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Pelvic Organ Prolapse

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review