Quality Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines in Psychosocial Oncology Using the AGREE‐II Instrument
- 1Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology McGill University Montreal Quebec Canada
- 2Science and Practice in Psychology Research Lab McGill University Montreal Quebec Canada
- 3Ingram School of Nursing McGill University Montreal Quebec Canada
Abstract
Objective The use of evidence in clinical practice is essential for the provision of best practice care in psychosocial oncology. However, research demonstrates gaps in the implementation of evidence‐based interventions and important resource barriers for clinicians. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are designed to translate the latest evidence into recommendations applicable within various clinical domains. A recent study identified 23 English‐language, up‐to‐date psychosocial oncology CPGs. The present study sought to systematically assess the quality of these tools. Methods CPGs were independently evaluated by four trained appraisers using the AGREE II tool, consisting of 23 items across six domains. Quality was determined using aggregate and consensus domain scores (0%–100%), with an acceptability cut‐off score of 60%. Results Findings revealed that 20 of the 23 CPGs (87%) met the acceptability threshold (M = 76.45, SD = 12.35). The highest average domain scores were observed for Clarity of Presentation (M = 96.26, SD = 6.25) and Scope and Purpose (M = 87.38, SD = 19.55) while Applicability received the lowest score (M = 33.83, SD = 10.72). Rigor of Development scores (M = 71.17, SD = 17.46) demonstrated substantial variations across CPGs. Conclusions Findings indicate that psychosocial oncology CPGs are specific and clear but may benefit from more transparency in reporting procedures and greater consideration of applicability and implementation strategies. These findings may help illuminate guideline developers on gaps in current tools and serve to inform clinicians on the strengths and shortcomings of these tools prior to selecting which ones to integrate within their clinical practice.
Related
- A quality appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for herpes zoster and postherpetic neuralgia using the AGREE II instrument: A systematic review.
- Appraisal of clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements on aspirin in pregnancy: a systematic review using the AGREE II instrument
- Quality appraisal of clinical practice guidelines for fertility preservation in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review using AGREE II and AGREE-REX.
- An Evaluation of the Guidelines for Premature Rupture of Membranes Based on the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II, the Scientific, Transparent, and Applicable Rankings, and the Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Health Care Methods
- Thrombophilia Testing After VTE and in Related Clinical Contexts: Is It Necessary, and Does It Change Management? Appraisal of Evidence, Guidelines, and Clinical Yield
BibTeX
@article{bergeron2026quality,
title = {{Quality Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines in Psychosocial Oncology Using the AGREE‐II Instrument}},
author = {Catherine Bergeron and Michelle Azzi and Catherine Hébert and Kia Watkins‐Martin and Adina Coroiu and Carmen G. Loiselle and Martin Drapeau and Annett Körner},
journal = {Cancer Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1002/cam4.72403},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.72403},
note = {CC BY-NC},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Quality Appraisal of Clinical Practice Guidelines in Psychosocial Oncology Using the AGREE‐II Instrument
AU - Catherine Bergeron
AU - Michelle Azzi
AU - Catherine Hébert
AU - Kia Watkins‐Martin
AU - Adina Coroiu
AU - Carmen G. Loiselle
AU - Martin Drapeau
AU - Annett Körner
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/01
JO - Cancer Medicine
DO - 10.1002/cam4.72403
UR - https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.72403
AB - Objective The use of evidence in clinical practice is essential for the provision of best practice care in psychosocial oncology. However, research demonstrates gaps in the implementation of evidence‐based interventions and important resource barriers for clinicians. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are designed to translate the latest evidence into recommendations applicable within various clinical domains. A recent study identified 23 English‐language, up‐to‐date psychosocial oncology CPGs. The present study sought to systematically assess the quality of these tools. Methods CPGs were independently evaluated by four trained appraisers using the AGREE II tool, consisting of 23 items across six domains. Quality was determined using aggregate and consensus domain scores (0%–100%), with an acceptability cut‐off score of 60%. Results Findings revealed that 20 of the 23 CPGs (87%) met the acceptability threshold (M = 76.45, SD = 12.35). The highest average domain scores were observed for Clarity of Presentation (M = 96.26, SD = 6.25) and Scope and Purpose (M = 87.38, SD = 19.55) while Applicability received the lowest score (M = 33.83, SD = 10.72). Rigor of Development scores (M = 71.17, SD = 17.46) demonstrated substantial variations across CPGs. Conclusions Findings indicate that psychosocial oncology CPGs are specific and clear but may benefit from more transparency in reporting procedures and greater consideration of applicability and implementation strategies. These findings may help illuminate guideline developers on gaps in current tools and serve to inform clinicians on the strengths and shortcomings of these tools prior to selecting which ones to integrate within their clinical practice.
SN - 2045-7634
ER -