Highlights
i) Purpose of the AGREE II Instrument
Clinical practice guidelines (‘guidelines’) are systematically developed statements to assist
practitioner and patient decisions about appropriate health care for specific clinical
circumstances (1). In addition, guidelines can play an important role in health policy formation
(2,3) and have evolved to cover topics across the health care continuum (e.g., health promotion,
screening, diagnosis).
The potential benefits of guidelines are only as good as the quality of the guidelines themselves.
Appropriate methodologies and rigorous strategies in the guideline development process are
important for the successful implementation of the resulting recommendations (4-6). The quality
of guidelines can be extremely variable and some often fall short of basic standards (7-9).
The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation (AGREE) Instrument (10) was
developed to address the issue of variability in guideline quality. To that end, the AGREE
instrument is a tool that assesses the methodological rigour and transparency in which a
guideline is developed. The original AGREE instrument was refined, which resulted in the
AGREE II, and a User’s Manual was developed (11-13).
The purpose of the AGREE II, is to provide a framework to:
1. Assess the quality of guidelines;
2. Provide a methodological strategy for the development of guidelines; and
3. Inform what information and how information ought to be reported in guidelines.
The AGREE II replaces the original instrument as the preferred tool and can be used as part of
an overall quality mandate aimed to improve health care.
ii) History of the AGREE Project
The original AGREE Instrument was published in 2003 by a group of international guideline
developers and researchers, the AGREE Collaboration (10). The objective of the Collaboration
was to develop a tool to assess the quality of guidelines. The AGREE Collaboration defined
quality of guidelines as the confidence that the potential biases of guideline development have
been addressed adequately and that the recommendations are both internally and externally
valid, and are feasible for practice (10). The assessment includes judgments about the methods
used for developing the guidelines, the components of the final recommendations, and the
factors that are linked to their uptake. The result of the Collaboration’s effort was the original
AGREE Instrument, a 23-item tool comprising 6 quality domains. The AGREE Instrument has
been translated into many languages, has been cited in over 600 publications, and is endorsed
by several health care organizations. More details about the original instrument and related
publications are available on the AGREE Website (http://www.agreetrust.org/)
This Management Assignment has been solved by our Management Experts at My Uni Paper. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.
Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment Experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.
© Copyright 2026 My Uni Papers – Student Hustle Made Hassle Free. All rights reserved.