OphthoEvidence report: Protocol for quality appraisal of clinical practice guidelines in ophthalmology

Background/objectiveOphthalmologists rely on clinical practice guidelines to inform their practice. Not all guidelines, however, are considered trustworthy. For guidelines to be credible and evidence-based, internationally-accepted standards suggest that they must adhere to certain criteria. We aim to identify strengths and limitations of commonly used ophthalmology guidelines and provide insights to develop trustworthy, fit-for-purpose guidelines in the field.MethodsWe will search MEDLINE, Embase, Trip Database, the Royal College of Ophthalmologists (https://www.rcophth.ac.uk/) and American Academy of Ophthalmology (https://www.aao.org/clinical-statements) websites. From these sources, we will include a purposeful sample 100 guidelines published from 2015 onwards addressing diverse areas in ophthalmology (e.g., cornea, glaucoma, retina, paediatrics, etc.) — forty guidelines from major eye care organisations and sixty from diverse ophthalmology subspecialties and regions. We will appraise each guideline according to the modified National Guideline Clearinghouse Extent Adherence to Trustworthy Standards (NEATS) instrument.ConclusionBy identifying best practices and common pitfalls in existing guidelines, this work will provide a roadmap for creating more robust, transparent, and patient-centred clinical practice guidelines in ophthalmology.