Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 665

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Reporting Tool for Practice Guidelines in Health Care: The RIGHT Statement

Open access
Chen, Yaolong, Yang, Kehu, Marušić, Ana, Qaseem, Amir, Meerpohl, Joerg J., Flottorp, Signe, Akl, Elie A., Schünemann, Holger J., Chan, Edwin S.Y., Falck-Ytter, Yngve, Ahmed, Faruque, Barber, Sarah, Chen, Chiehfeng, Zhang, Mingming, Xu, Bin, Tian, Jinhui, Song, Fujian, Shang, Hongcai, Tang, Kun, Wang, Qi, Norris, Susan L., for the RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) Working Group†·2017·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

The quality of reporting practice guidelines is often poor, and there is no widely accepted guidance or standards for such reporting in health care. The international RIGHT (Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare) Working Group was established to address this gap. The group followed an existing framework for developing guidelines for health research reporting and the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network approach. It developed a checklist and an explanation and elaboration statement. The RIGHT checklist includes 22 items that are considered essential for good reporting of practice guidelines: basic information (items 1 to 4), background (items 5 to 9), evidence (items 10 to 12), recommendations (items 13 to 15), review and quality assurance (items 16 and 17), funding and declaration and management of interests (items 18 and 19), and other information (items 20 to 22). The RIGHT checklist can assist developers in reporting guidelines, support journal editors and peer reviewers when considering guideline reports, and help health care practitioners understand and implement a guideline.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7326/m16-1565

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Cited by

See all 665

Metadata

Authors
Chen, Y., Yang, K., Marušić, A., Qaseem, A., Meerpohl, J. J., Flottorp, S., Akl, E. A., Schünemann, H. J., Chan, E. S. Y., Falck-Ytter, Y., Ahmed, F., Barber, S., Chen, C., Zhang, M., Xu, B., Tian, J., Song, F., Shang, H., Tang, K., Wang, Q., Norris, S. L., & for the RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) Working Group†
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
2017-01-17
Volume
166
Issue
2
Pages
128-132
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W2559090026
Cited by
665
References
16
FWCI
38.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Reporting Tool for Practice Guidelines in Health Care: The RIGHT Statement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7326/m16-1565
The paper
Chen, Y., Yang, K., Marušić, A., Qaseem, A., Meerpohl, J. J., Flottorp, S., Akl, E. A., Schünemann, H. J., Chan, E. S. Y., Falck-Ytter, Y., Ahmed, F., Barber, S., Chen, C., Zhang, M., Xu, B., Tian, J., Song, F., Shang, H., Tang, K., . . . for the RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare) Working Group†. (2017). A Reporting Tool for Practice Guidelines in Health Care: The RIGHT Statement. Annals of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.7326/m16-1565

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.