Quality assessment of clinical guidelines and consensus statements for acute myocardial infarction

ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of clinical guidelines and consensus statements for acute myocardial infarction.MethodsDatabases including PubMed,EMbase,Web of Science,China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM),WanFang Data,and China National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI) were systematically searched,supplemented by searches of the Guidelines International Network(GIN),the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence(NICE),the US National Guideline Clearinghouse(NGC),and the Medlive website.The search period covered from database inception to April 30,2025.Two researchers independently screened the literature based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and extracted relevant data.The methodological and reporting quality of the included literature was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation(AGREE Ⅱ) instrument and the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare(RIGHT) checklist.ResultsA total of 11 guidelines and consensus statements on acute myocardial infarction were included.Subgroup analysis showed that guidelines scored higher than consensus statements in two AGREE Ⅱ domains("scope and purpose" and "stakeholder involvement").Guidelines and consensus statements developed based on evidence⁃based medicine methods scored higher in all six AGREE Ⅱ domains and in the overall RIGHT score compared to those based on expert opinion or reviews.Internationally developed guidelines and consensus statements scored higher in all six AGREE Ⅱ domains and in the overall RIGHT score compared to those developed in China.ConclusionsThe currently published clinical guidelines and consensus statements for acute myocardial infarction demonstrate suboptimal methodological and reporting quality.Chinese guidelines and consensus statements still have room for improvement compared to their international counterparts. It is recommended that relevant professional organizations and researchers refer to the AGREE Ⅱ and RIGHT criteria to develop and widely promote high⁃quality clinical guidelines and consensus statements for the diagnosis and treatment of acute myocardial infarction.