Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

© 2018 Elsevier Inc. Objectives: To determine the association between the quality of guidelines for diagnostic tests (both the quality and reporting and the quality of the evidence underpinning recommendations) and nonadherence. Study Design and Setting: We conducted a meta-epidemiological study. We previously published a systematic review that quantified the percentage of test use that was nonadherent with guidelines. For the present study, we assessed these guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. We then assessed the quality of evidence underpinning recommendations within these guidelines using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Linear models were then constructed to determine the association between guideline nonadherence and (1) AGREE II score and (2) GRADE score. Results: There was no significant association between AGREE II score and nonadherent testing (P = 0.09). There was a significant association between GRADE score and nonadherence: recommendations based on low-quality and very low–quality evidence had 38% (P < 0.01) and 24% (P = 0.02) more nonadherent testing, compared with recommendations based on high-quality evidence. Conclusion: Diagnostic test guideline recommendations based on high-quality evidence are adhered to more frequently.

Original publication




Journal article


Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Publication Date





40 - 50