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

CHECKLIST ITEM AND DESCRIPTIONREPORTING CRITERIA

Page#DOMAIN 1: SCOPE AND PURPOSE
1. OBJECTIVES
Report the overall objective(s) of theguideline. The expected health benefits
from the guideline are to be specific to theclinical problem or health topic.
2. QUESTIONS
Report the health question(s) covered bythe guideline, particularly for the key
recommendations.
3. POPULATION
Describe the population (i.e., patients,public, etc.) to whom the guideline is meantto apply.

¨ Health intent(s) (i.e., prevention, screening,diagnosis, treatment, etc.)¨ Expected benefit(s) or outcome(s)¨ Target(s) (e.g., patient population, society)
¨
¨
¨
¨
¨
¨
¨
¨
¨
¨

Target population
Intervention(s) or exposure(s)Comparisons (if appropriate)
Outcome(s)Health care setting or context
Target population, sex and age
Clinical condition (if relevant)Severity/stage of disease (if relevant)Comorbidities (if relevant)Excluded populations (if relevant)

DOMAIN 2: STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT
4. GROUP MEMBERSHIP
Report all individuals who were involved in
the development process. This may include
members of the steering group, theresearch team involved in selecting andreviewing/rating the evidence andindividuals involved in formulating the final
recommendations.
5. TARGET POPULATIONPREFERENCES AND VIEWS
Report how the views and preferences of
the target population weresought/considered and what the resulting
outcomes were.

6. TARGET USERS
Report the target (or intended) users of theguideline.  

¨ Name of participant¨ Discipline/content expertise (e.g., neurosurgeon,methodologist)¨ Institution (e.g., St. Peter’s hospital)¨ Geographical location (e.g., Seattle, WA)¨ A description of the member’s role in theguideline development groupo¨ Statement of type of strategy used to capture
patients’/publics’ views and preferences (e.g.,participation in the guideline development group,literature review of values and preferences)¨ Methods by which preferences and views weresought (e.g., evidence from literature, surveys,
focus groups)¨ Outcomes/information gathered on patient/publicinformation¨ How the information gathered was used to informthe guideline development process and/or
formation of the recommendations¨ The intended guideline audience (e.g.
specialists, family physicians, patients, clinical or
institutional leaders/administrators)¨ How the guideline may be used by its target
audience (e.g., to inform clinical decisions, toinform policy, to inform standards of care)

1

DOMAIN 3: RIGOUR OF DEVELOPMENT
7. SEARCH METHODS
Report details of the strategy used tosearch for evidence.

8. EVIDENCE SELECTION CRITERIA
Report the criteria used to select (i.e.,include and exclude) the evidence. Provide
rationale, where appropriate.

9. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS OF THE
EVIDENCE
Describe the strengths and limitations ofthe evidence. Consider from theperspective of the individual studies andthe body of evidence aggregated across all
the studies. Tools exist that can facilitate
the reporting of this concept.
10. FORMULATION OF
RECOMMENDATIONS
Describe the methods used to formulate
the recommendations and how final
decisions were reached. Specify any areasof disagreement and the methods used toresolve them.

11. CONSIDERATION OF BENEFITS AND
HARMS
Report the health benefits, side effects,
and risks that were considered when
formulating the recommendations.
12. LINK BETWEENRECOMMENDATIONS AND EVIDENCE
Describe the explicit link between therecommendations and the evidence on
which they are based.  

¨ Named electronic database(s) or evidence
source(s) where the search was performed (e.g.,MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL)¨ Time periods searched (e.g., January 1, 2004 toMarch 31, 2008)¨ Search terms used (e.g., text words, indexing
terms, subheadings)¨ Full search strategy included (e.g., possibly
located in appendix)¨ Target population (patient, public, etc.)
characteristics¨ Study design¨ Comparisons (if relevant)¨ Outcomes¨ Language (if relevant)¨ Context (if relevant)¨ Study design(s) included in body of evidence¨ Study methodology limitations (sampling,blinding, allocation concealment, analyticalmethods)¨ Appropriateness/relevance of primary andsecondary outcomes considered¨ Consistency of results across studies¨ Direction of results across studies¨ Magnitude of benefit versus magnitude of harm
¨ Applicability to practice context¨ Recommendation development process (e.g.,steps used in modified Delphi technique, voting
procedures that were considered)¨ Outcomes of the recommendation development
process (e.g., extent to which consensus wasreached using modified Delphi technique,outcome of voting procedures)¨ How the process influenced therecommendations (e.g., results of Delphi
technique influence final recommendation,alignment with recommendations and the finalvote)¨ Supporting data and report of benefits¨ Supporting data and report of harms/sideeffects/risks¨ Reporting of the balance/trade-off between
benefits and harms/side effects/risks¨ Recommendations reflect considerations of bothbenefits and harms/side effects/risks¨ How the guideline development group linked andused the evidence to inform recommendations¨ Link between each recommendation and key
evidence (text description and/or reference list)¨ Link between recommendations and evidence
summaries and/or evidence tables in the results
section of the guideline213. EXTERNAL REVIEW
Report the methodology used to conduct
the external review.

14. UPDATING PROCEDURE
Describe the procedure for updating theguideline.

¨ Purpose and intent of the external review (e.g., toimprove quality, gather feedback on draft
recommendations, assess applicability andfeasibility, 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 informthe guideline development process and/orformation of the recommendations (e.g.,guideline panel considered results of review informing final recommendations)¨ A statement that the guideline will be updated¨ Explicit time interval or explicit criteria to guidedecisions about when an update will occur¨ Methodology for the updating procedure

DOMAIN 4: CLARITY OF PRESENTATION
15. SPECIFIC AND UNAMBIGUOUS
RECOMMENDATIONS
Describe which options are appropriate inwhich situations and in which populationgroups, as informed by the body ofevidence.

16. MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
Describe the different options for managing
the condition or health issue.
17. IDENTIFIABLE KEY
RECOMMENDATIONS
Present the key recommendations so thatthey are easy to identify.

¨ A statement of the recommended action¨ Intent or purpose of the recommended action(e.g., to improve quality of life, to decrease sideeffects)¨ Relevant population (e.g., patients, public)¨ Caveats or qualifying statements, if relevant(e.g., patients or conditions for whom therecommendations would not apply)¨ If there is uncertainty about the best careoption(s), the uncertainty should be stated in theguideline¨ Description of management options¨ Population or clinical situation most appropriate
to each option¨ Recommendations in a summarized box, typed
in bold, underlined, or presented as flow charts
or algorithms¨ Specific recommendations grouped together in
one section

DOMAIN 5: APPLICABILITY
18. FACILITATORS AND BARRIERS TO
APPLICATION
Describe the facilitators and barriers to theguideline’s application.  

¨ Types of facilitators and barriers that wereconsidered¨ Methods by which information regarding thefacilitators 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 facilitatorsand barriers that emerged from the inquiry (e.g.,practitioners have the skills to deliver therecommended care, sufficient equipment is notavailable to ensure all eligible members of the3

19. IMPLEMENTATION ADVICE/TOOLS
Provide advice and/or tools on how therecommendations can be applied inpractice.

20. RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS
Describe any potential resource
implications of applying therecommendations.

21. MONITORING/ AUDITING CRITERIA
Provide monitoring and/or auditing criteria
to measure the application of guideline
recommendations.

population receive mammography)¨ How the information influenced the guideline
development process and/or formation of therecommendations¨ Additional materials to support theimplementation of the guideline in practice. For
example:o Guideline summary documentso Links to check lists, algorithms
o Links to how-to manuals
o Solutions linked to barrier analysis (see Item18)
o Tools to capitalize on guideline facilitators(see Item 18)
o Outcome of pilot test and lessons learned¨ Types of cost information that were considered(e.g., economic evaluations, drug acquisitioncosts)¨ Methods by which the cost information wassought (e.g., a health economist was part of theguideline development panel, use of healthtechnology assessments for specific drugs, etc.)¨ Information/description of the cost informationthat emerged from the inquiry (e.g., specific drug
acquisition costs per treatment course)¨ How the information gathered was used to informthe guideline development process and/orformation of the recommendations¨ Criteria to assess guideline implementation or
adherence to recommendations¨ Criteria for assessing impact of implementing therecommendations¨ Advice on the frequency and interval ofmeasurement¨ Operational definitions of how the criteria shouldbe measured

DOMAIN 6: EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE
22. FUNDING BODY
Report the funding body’s influence on thecontent of the guideline.
23. COMPETING INTERESTS
Provide an explicit statement that all groupmembers have declared whether they haveany competing interests.

¨ The name of the funding body or source offunding (or explicit statement of no funding)¨ A statement that the funding body did not
influence the content of the guideline¨ Types of competing interests considered¨ Methods by which potential competing interests
were sought¨ A description of the competing interests¨ How the competing interests influenced theguideline process and development ofrecommendations  From:Brouwers MC, Kerkvliet K, Spithoff K, on behalf of the AGREE Next Steps Consortium. The AGREE Reporting Checklist: a tool toimprove 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 www.agreetrust.org.  

4