The effect of a methodologist role and systematic review process on expert opinion recommendations
| Methodologist | Total | p | ||
| Yes (n=24) | No/Unclear (n=45) | |||
| Mean rate of EO recommendations per guideline* (SD) | 0.30 (0.18) | 0.49 (0.33) | 0.43 (0.30) | 0.03 |
| Mean rate of EO recommendations that cited evidence† (SD) | 0.51 (0.31) | 0.22 (0.2) | 0.32 (0.3) | <0.001 |
| Number of guidelines that used ‘Lack of evidence’ as a rationale for the EO recommendations (%) | 14 (50) | 14 (31.1) | 28 (40.6) | 0.04 |
| Number of CPG that had its own SR in it or had an SR commissioned (%) | 21 (87.5) | 7 (15.6) | 28 (40.6) | <0.001 |
| Number of CPG that cited published SRs, had a rapid review or an updated literature scan (%) | 3 (12.5) | 38 (84.4) | 41 (59.4) | |
| CPG that had its own SR in it or had SR commissioned (n=28) | CPG that cited published SRs or had a rapid review or an updated literature scan (n=41) | Total | p | |
| Mean rate EO recommendations that cited evidence† (SD) | 0.54 (0.31) | 0.18 (0.19) | 0.32 (0.30) | <0.001 |