Data sources and searches
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
(PRISMA 2020) guidelines utilized for systematic search and selection of
clinical practice guidelines on UCP. All authors participated in the
literature search and evaluation of suitable guidelines. Guidelines were
searched on databases including PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, Web of
Science, Cochrane and guideline websites like the Royal College of
Obstetricians & Gynaecologists, NICE, European, Australian, NZ, Canada,
US, Malaysia, Singapore professional societies, from inception till
November 2021. The study design is shown in the PRISMA 2020 flowchart
(Fig.1.)
Our MeSH terms or keywords for the search were “cord prolapse” AND
“guideline” AND “clinical practice guidelines”. Guidelines were
selected if they fulfilled all the predetermined inclusion criteria
stated below. Three reviewers independently screened the retrieved
records, before coming together to determine selection of the guidelines
fulfilling our inclusion criteria. This decision was further reviewed by
the fourth researcher. The guidelines were manually sought, and
duplicates were removed manually without the use of a software due to
the small number of guidelines available. Data collection was done by
three reviewers independently using the AGREE II Instrument 2009
appraisal tool. This AGREE-II is an internationally recognized tool to
assess the quality of guidelines. The guidelines were scored across 6
different domains namely, (i) scope and purpose; (ii) stakeholder
involvement; (iii) rigor of development; (iv) clarity of presentation;
(v) applicability; and (vi) editorial independence.