Assessment by domain
Scope and purpose
Only the RCOG scored well for this domain, it is its second highest domain among the 7 at 87.04%. The other two guidelines scored under 40%. The mean was 48.77%, skewed by RCOG’s score. SAPPG and RCPI scored 24.07% and 35.19% respectively.
Stakeholder involvement
All three CPGs scored under 40%; none explicitly described stakeholder involvement. This is the only domain RCPI scored the highest at 38.89%.
Rigor of development
This domain has seven components and has the widest range of scores, with RCOG scoring 73.61% and the SAPPG guideline scoring 9.72%. The RCOG is rigorous in its development, mainly because it has a separate guideline drawn based on the AGREE II. The SAPPG, on the other hand, did not elaborate its process of development. Moreover, the guidelines had different methods of stating the level of evidence and grade of recommendations, with the SAPPG not citing their evidence within the text.
Clarity of presentation
The domain “Clarity of Presentation” achieved the highest overall score with the tightest range. The SAPPG and RCPI guidelines scored almost similarly (87% and 87.04, respectively) whilst RCOG scored 92.59%. This was the highest scoring for all three guidelines individually, as well, with a mean score of 89%.
Applicability
All three guidelines had low scores, less than 25%; SA guideline was below 10%. This also showed in its mean as it was the poorest in among all domains, at 9.26% The major factor contributing the latter was not reporting implementation facilitators or resource implications.
Editorial independence
This was the lowest scoring domain, with the SAPPG and RCPI scoring 2.78%. RCOG score was 20% higher.