Skip to main content

Table 1 Comparison between the AGREE I and AGREE II

From: Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE instrument: comparison between data obtained from AGREE I and AGREE II

AGREE I AGREE II Change from AGREE I to AGREE II
Domain No Item Item No Domain
1. Scope and purpose 1 The overall objective(s) of the guideline is (are) specifically described The overall objective(s) of the guideline is (are) specifically described 1 1. Scope and purpose No change
2 The clinical question(s) covered by the guideline is (are) specifically described The health question(s) covered by the guideline is (are) specifically described 2 Change in underline part
3 The patients to whom the guideline is meant to apply are specifically described The population (patients, public, etc.) to whom the guideline is meant to apply is specifically described 3 Change in underline part
2. Stakeholder involvement 4 The guideline development group includes individuals from all the relevant professional groups The guideline development group includes individuals from all the relevant professional groups 4 2. Stakeholder involvement No change
5 The patients’ views and preferences have been sought The views and preferences of the target population (patients, public, etc.) have been sought 5 Change in underline part
6 The target users of the guideline are clearly defined. No The target users of the guideline are clearly defined. No 6 No change
7 The guideline has been piloted among end users     Delete item. Incorporated into user guide description of item 19
3. Rigour of development 8 Systematic methods were used to search for evidence Systematic methods were used to search for evidence 7 3. Rigour of development No change, renumber to 7
9 The criteria for selecting the evidence are clearly described The criteria for selecting the evidence are clearly described 8 No change, renumber to 8
   The strengths and limitations of the body of evidence are clearly described 9 New item
10 The methods for formulating the recommendations are clearly described The methods for formulating the recommendations are clearly described 10 No change
11 The health benefits, side effects, and risks have been considered in formulating the recommendations The health benefits, side effects, and risks have been considered in formulating the recommendations 11 No change
12 There is an explicit link between the recommendations and the supporting evidence There is an explicit link between the recommendations and the supporting evidence 12 No change
13 The guideline has been externally reviewed by experts prior to its publication The guideline has been externally reviewed by experts prior to its publication 13 No change
14 A procedure for updating the guideline is provided A procedure for updating the guideline is provided 14 No change
4. Clarity of presentation 15 The recommendations are specific and unambiguous The recommendations are specific and unambiguous 15 4. Clarity of presentation No change
16 The different options for management of the condition are clearly presented The different options for management of the condition or health issue are clearly presented 16 Change in underline part
17 Key recommendations are easily identifiable Key recommendations are easily identifiable 17 No change
18 The guideline is supported with tools for application The guideline describes facilitators and barriers to its application 19 5. Applicability Change in underline part, renumber to 19, change in domain from #4 clarity of presentation to #5 applicability
5. Applicability 19 The potential organizational barriers in applying the recommendations have been discussed The guideline provides advice and/or tools on how the recommendations can be put into practice 18 Change in underline part, renumber to 18.
20 The potential cost implications of applying the recommendations have been considered The potential resource implications of applying the recommendations have been considered 20 Change in underline part
21 The guideline presents key review criteria for monitoring and/ or audit purposes The guideline presents monitoring and/ or auditing criteria 21 Change in underline part
6. Editorial independence 22 The guideline is editorially independent from the funding body The views of the funding body have not influenced the content of the guideline 22 6. Editorial independence Change in underline part
23 Conflicts of interest of guideline development members have been recorded Competing interests of guideline development group members have been recorded and addressed 23 Change in underline part
Overall guideline assessment    Rate the overall quality of this guideline 1 Overall guideline assessment New item
1 I would recommend this guideline for use I would recommend this guideline for use 2 Renumber to 2