AGREE Reporting Checklist

2016
This checklist is intended to guide the reporting of clinical practice guidelines.

Page
CHECKLIST ITEM AND DESCRIPTION REPORTING CRITERIA
#
DOMAIN 1: SCOPE AND PURPOSE
1. OBJECTIVES Health intent(s) (i.e., prevention, screening, 13
Report the overall objective(s) of the diagnosis, treatment, etc.)
guideline. The expected health benefits Expected benefit(s) or outcome(s)
from the guideline are to be specific to the Target(s) (e.g., patient population, society)
clinical problem or health topic.
2. QUESTIONS Target population 10-11
Report the health question(s) covered by Intervention(s) or exposure(s)
the guideline, particularly for the key Comparisons (if appropriate)
recommendations. Outcome(s)
Health care setting or context
3. POPULATION Target population, sex and age 9
Describe the population (i.e., patients, Clinical condition (if relevant)
public, etc.) to whom the guideline is Severity/stage of disease (if relevant)
meant to apply. Comorbidities (if relevant)
Excluded populations (if relevant)
DOMAIN 2: STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT
4. GROUP MEMBERSHIP Name of participant 3-4-5
Report all individuals who were involved in Discipline/content expertise (e.g., o
the development process. This may neurosurgeon, methodologist)
include members of the steering group, the Institution (e.g., St. Peter’s hospital)
research team involved in selecting and Geographical location (e.g., Seattle, WA)
reviewing/rating the evidence and A description of the member’s role in the
individuals involved in formulating the final guideline development group
recommendations.
5. TARGET POPULATION Statement of type of strategy used to capture 17-
PREFERENCES AND VIEWS patients’/publics’ views and preferences (e.g., 18-19
Report how the views and preferences of participation in the guideline development
the target population were group, literature review of values and
sought/considered and what the resulting preferences)
outcomes were. Methods by which preferences and views were
sought (e.g., evidence from literature, surveys,
focus groups)
Outcomes/information gathered on
patient/public information
How the information gathered was used to
inform the guideline development process
and/or formation of the recommendations
6. TARGET USERS The intended guideline audience (e.g. 9
Report the target (or intended) users of the specialists, family physicians, patients, clinical
guideline. or institutional leaders/administrators)
How the guideline may be used by its target
audience (e.g., to inform clinical decisions, to
inform policy, to inform standards of care)

1
DOMAIN 3: RIGOUR OF DEVELOPMENT
7. SEARCH METHODS Named electronic database(s) or evidence 9 y 17
Report details of the strategy used to source(s) where the search was performed
search for evidence. (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO,
CINAHL)
Time periods searched (e.g., January 1, 2004
to March 31, 2008)
Search terms used (e.g., text words, indexing
terms, subheadings)
Full search strategy included (e.g., possibly
located in appendix)
8. EVIDENCE SELECTION CRITERIA Target population (patient, public, etc.) 18
Report the criteria used to select (i.e., characteristics
include and exclude) the evidence. Study design
Provide rationale, where appropriate. Comparisons (if relevant)
Outcomes
Language (if relevant)
Context (if relevant)
9. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS OF THE Study design(s) included in body of evidence
EVIDENCE Study methodology limitations (sampling,
Describe the strengths and limitations of blinding, allocation concealment, analytical
the evidence. Consider from the methods)
perspective of the individual studies and Appropriateness/relevance of primary and
the body of evidence aggregated across secondary outcomes considered
all the studies. Tools exist that can Consistency of results across studies
facilitate the reporting of this concept. Direction of results across studies
Magnitude of benefit versus magnitude of harm
Applicability to practice context
10. FORMULATION OF Recommendation development process (e.g., 20
RECOMMENDATIONS steps used in modified Delphi technique, voting
Describe the methods used to formulate procedures that were considered)
the recommendations and how final Outcomes of the recommendation development
decisions were reached. Specify any process (e.g., extent to which consensus was
areas of disagreement and the methods reached using modified Delphi technique,
used to resolve them. outcome of voting procedures)
How the process influenced the
recommendations (e.g., results of Delphi
technique influence final recommendation,
alignment with recommendations and the final
vote)
11. CONSIDERATION OF BENEFITS Supporting data and report of benefits 23-26-
AND HARMS Supporting data and report of harms/side 27-32
Report the health benefits, side effects, effects/risks
and risks that were considered when Reporting of the balance/trade-off between
formulating the recommendations. benefits and harms/side effects/risks
Recommendations reflect considerations of
both benefits and harms/side effects/risks
12. LINK BETWEEN How the guideline development group linked 21-24-
RECOMMENDATIONS AND EVIDENCE and used the evidence to inform 29-32
Describe the explicit link between the recommendations
recommendations and the evidence on Link between each recommendation and key
which they are based. evidence (text description and/or reference list)

2
 Link between recommendations and evidence
summaries and/or evidence tables in the results
section of the guideline
13. EXTERNAL REVIEW Purpose and intent of the external review (e.g.,
Report the methodology used to conduct to improve quality, gather feedback on draft
the external review. recommendations, assess applicability and
feasibility, disseminate evidence)
Methods taken to undertake the external review
(e.g., rating scale, open-ended questions)
Description of the external reviewers (e.g.,
number, type of reviewers, affiliations)
Outcomes/information gathered from the
external review (e.g., summary of key findings)
How the information gathered was used to
inform the guideline development process
and/or formation of the recommendations (e.g.,
guideline panel considered results of review in
forming final recommendations)
14. UPDATING PROCEDURE A statement that the guideline will be updated
Describe the procedure for updating the Explicit time interval or explicit criteria to guide
guideline. decisions about when an update will occur
Methodology for the updating procedure
DOMAIN 4: CLARITY OF PRESENTATION
15. SPECIFIC AND UNAMBIGUOUS A statement of the recommended action
RECOMMENDATIONS Intent or purpose of the recommended action
Describe which options are appropriate in (e.g., to improve quality of life, to decrease side
which situations and in which population effects)
groups, as informed by the body of Relevant population (e.g., patients, public)
evidence. Caveats or qualifying statements, if relevant
(e.g., patients or conditions for whom the
recommendations would not apply)
If there is uncertainty about the best care
option(s), the uncertainty should be stated in
the guideline
16. MANAGEMENT OPTIONS Description of management options
Describe the different options for Population or clinical situation most appropriate
managing the condition or health issue. to each option
17. IDENTIFIABLE KEY Recommendations in a summarized box, typed
RECOMMENDATIONS in bold, underlined, or presented as flow charts
Present the key recommendations so that or algorithms
they are easy to identify. Specific recommendations grouped together in
one section
DOMAIN 5: APPLICABILITY
18. FACILITATORS AND BARRIERS TO Types of facilitators and barriers that were
APPLICATION considered
Describe the facilitators and barriers to the Methods by which information regarding the
guideline’s application. facilitators and barriers to implementing
recommendations were sought (e.g., feedback
from key stakeholders, pilot testing of
guidelines before widespread implementation)
Information/description of the types of
facilitators and barriers that emerged from the

3
 inquiry (e.g., practitioners have the skills to
deliver the recommended care, sufficient
equipment is not available to ensure all eligible
members of the population receive
mammography)
How the information influenced the guideline
development process and/or formation of the
recommendations
19. IMPLEMENTATION ADVICE/TOOLS Additional materials to support the
Provide advice and/or tools on how the implementation of the guideline in practice.
recommendations can be applied in For example:
practice. o Guideline summary documents
o Links to check lists, algorithms
o Links to how-to manuals
o Solutions linked to barrier analysis (see
Item 18)
o Tools to capitalize on guideline facilitators
(see Item 18)
o Outcome of pilot test and lessons learned
20. RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS Types of cost information that were considered
Describe any potential resource (e.g., economic evaluations, drug acquisition
implications of applying the costs)
recommendations. Methods by which the cost information was
sought (e.g., a health economist was part of the
guideline development panel, use of health
technology assessments for specific drugs,
etc.)
Information/description of the cost information
that emerged from the inquiry (e.g., specific
drug acquisition costs per treatment course)
How the information gathered was used to
inform the guideline development process
and/or formation of the recommendations
21. MONITORING/ AUDITING CRITERIA Criteria to assess guideline implementation or
Provide monitoring and/or auditing criteria adherence to recommendations
to measure the application of guideline Criteria for assessing impact of implementing
recommendations. the recommendations
Advice on the frequency and interval of
measurement
Operational definitions of how the criteria
should be measured
DOMAIN 6: EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE
22. FUNDING BODY The name of the funding body or source of
Report the funding body’s influence on the funding (or explicit statement of no funding)
content of the guideline. A statement that the funding body did not
influence the content of the guideline
23. COMPETING INTERESTS Types of competing interests considered
Provide an explicit statement that all group Methods by which potential competing interests
members have declared whether they were sought
have any competing interests. A description of the competing interests
How the competing interests influenced the
guideline process and development of
recommendations

4
From:
Brouwers MC, Kerkvliet K, Spithoff K, on behalf of the AGREE Next Steps Consortium. The AGREE Reporting Checklist: a tool to
improve reporting of clinical practice guidelines. BMJ 2016;352:i1152. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i1152.

For more information about the AGREE Reporting Checklist, please visit the AGREE Enterprise website at
http://www.agreetrust.org.