Objective：The present study is aimed to evaluate the quality of two clinical practice guidelines on stomatology published lately in China and overseas so that the limitations of development of clinical practive guideline in China could be emphasized，which will be helpful to improve the methodological quality to develope evidence-based guide line and to update the current guidelines in the future. Methods：Guidelines on stomatology published from 2014 to 2016 were electronically searched in PubMed，Wanfang，CNKI and databases of National Guideline Clearing house. One guideline on stomatology developed in China and another one developed overseas were selected. The quality was evaluated by the AGREE II tool and then descriptive analysis was performed. Results：Only one clinical practice guideline on stomatology was published in China. i. e. Guidelines for the use of microscopes in endodontics in 2016. Another clinical practice guideline(Evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the use of pit-and-fissure sealants) developed in USA was selected. Based on 23 items organized into the original 6 quality domains，the selected foreign guideline was deemed to conform to 22 items except for 1 item. The selected domestic guideline did only conform to 1 item. Conclusion：Compared with the Evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the use of pit-and-fissure sealants developed in USA，the domestic clinical practice guideline has not yet conformed to the procedure to develop the evidence-based clinical practice guideline，which indicates that domestic stomatology experts should emphasize the transparency and methodology rigor when they develop new clinical practice guidelines.