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.