Assessing the methodological strengths and limitations of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) guidelines: a critical appraisal using AGREE II and AGREE-REX tool

BackgroundThe Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) has provided open-access guidelines for cancer since 2014. However, no independent assessment of their quality has been conducted to date. This study aimed to critically evaluate the quality of SEOM guidelines on cancer treatment.MethodsAppraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) and AGREE-REX tool was used to evaluate the qualities of the guidelines.ResultsWe assessed 33 guidelines, with 84.8% rated as high quality. The highest median standardized scores (96.3) were observed in the domain clarity of presentation, whereas applicability was distinctively low (31.4), with only one guideline scoring above 60%. SEOM guidelines did not include the views and preferences of the target population, nor did specify updating methods.ConclusionsAlthough developed with acceptable methodological rigor, SEOM guidelines could be improved in the future, particularly in terms of clinical applicability and patient perspectives.

Automated summary

This study evaluated the quality of cancer treatment guidelines from the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX tools. It found that 84.8% of the guidelines were rated as high quality, but there were areas for improvement in terms of clinical applicability and inclusion of patient perspectives.