Few prostate cancer guidelines are of high methodologic quality and therefore trustworthy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.9674Keywords:
prostate, guidelines, methodology, trustworthiness, NEATS, quality, evidence, GRADE, health policyAbstract
Introduction: Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy among men worldwide, underscoring the importance of high-quality, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in this field. We conducted this study to evaluate the methodologic quality of prostate cancer CPGs.
Methods: Following a prespecified protocol, we conducted a cross-sectional study of English-language prostate cancer CPGs published between 2014 and 2024, searching Medline (Ovid), Trip, EMBASE, ECRI, Guidelines International Network, and Guidelines Central databases. We included guidelines covering screening, diagnosis, and/or management of prostate cancer. Two reviewers independently applied the modified National Guideline Clearinghouse Extent of Adherence to Trustworthy Standards (NEATS) instrument, consisting of 10 items and generating summary scores from 10 (lowest) to 50 (highest) points. Guidelines were categorized as low- (≤16), intermediate- (17–31), or high-quality (≥32).
Results: Of 1005 references screened, 23 international guidelines met the inclusion criteria. Only six CPGs (26%) were rated high-quality; over one-third (8/23, 34.7%) were categorized as low-quality. Most CPGs inadequately reported conflicts of interest, multidisciplinary panel composition, or systematic review methods underpinning recommendations. No significant associations were observed between guideline quality and year of publication or breadth of scope.
Conclusions: Most prostate cancer CPGs published in English demonstrate limited methodologic rigor, not meeting National Academy of Medicine standards for trustworthy guidelines. Guideline users should critically appraise these documents prior to implementation, and developers are encouraged to adopt established frameworks, such as GRADE, to improve quality.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:
- Post the Article on any Web site
- Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
- Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
- Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.
The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.
You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.
The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:
- That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
- That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
- That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
- That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.
