Critical appraisal of Australian and New Zealand paediatric vision screening clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE II tool

Abstract

ABSTRACT Clinical Relevance Vision disorders in children impact health-related quality of life, with early detection and intervention improving outcomes and educational performance. Eye health professionals should be aware of paediatric vision screening guidelines and their development to understand the components of local programmes and the differences in sensitivity and specificity between protocols. Background High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for vision screening enable the early detection of common vision disorders; however, they require rigorous development to ensure optimal accuracy in detecting vision disorders, enabling timely interventions. This study evaluated the quality of available vision screening CPGs on vision screening of children in Australia and New Zealand. Methods A systematic search of academic databases, guideline databases, professional associations and Google search engines was conducted to identify relevant paediatric vision screening CPGs. Four independent reviewers used the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument to assess the quality of individual guidelines and scores were aggregated and reported as the percentage of the total possible score across the six AGREE II domains: scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigour of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, and editorial independence. Results Initial 2,999 items were evaluated, with seven guidelines included. AGREE-II quality score agreement ranged from 43.3% to 95.8%. All guidelines scored >60.0% in the scope and purpose, however, most had poor scores of <26.5% in the rigour of development and <3.3% in editorial independence domains. All guidelines recommended screening using measures of habitual distance vision. Conclusion Of the guidelines developed for use in Australia and New Zealand, most guidelines scored poorly when assessed against the AGREE II tool, because of lack of editorial independence and rigour of development. Paediatric vision screening guidelines should prioritise systematic review of literature to inform practice and include statements regarding competing interests.