Dataset Information

Guidelines 2.0: systematic development of a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although several tools to evaluate the credibility of health care guidelines exist, guidance on practical steps for developing guidelines is lacking. We systematically compiled a comprehensive checklist of items linked to relevant resources and tools that guideline developers could consider, without the expectation that every guideline would address each item.

Methods

We searched data sources, including manuals of international guideline developers, literature on guidelines for guidelines (with a focus on methodology reports from international and national agencies, and professional societies) and recent articles providing systematic guidance. We reviewed these sources in duplicate, extracted items for the checklist using a sensitive approach and developed overarching topics relevant to guidelines. In an iterative process, we reviewed items for duplication and omissions and involved experts in guideline development for revisions and suggestions for items to be added.

Results

We developed a checklist with 18 topics and 146 items and a webpage to facilitate its use by guideline developers. The topics and included items cover all stages of the guideline enterprise, from the planning and formulation of guidelines, to their implementation and evaluation. The final checklist includes links to training materials as well as resources with suggested methodology for applying the items.

Interpretation

The checklist will serve as a resource for guideline developers. Consideration of items on the checklist will support the development, implementation and evaluation of guidelines. We will use crowdsourcing to revise the checklist and keep it up to date.

SUBMITTER: Schunemann HJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3928232 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Guidelines 2.0: systematic development of a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise.

Schünemann Holger J HJ Wiercioch Wojtek W Etxeandia Itziar I Falavigna Maicon M Santesso Nancy N Mustafa Reem R Ventresca Matthew M Brignardello-Petersen Romina R Laisaar Kaja-Triin KT Kowalski Sérgio S Baldeh Tejan T Zhang Yuan Y Raid Ulla U Neumann Ignacio I Norris Susan L SL Thornton Judith J Harbour Robin R Treweek Shaun S Guyatt Gordon G Alonso-Coello Pablo P Reinap Marge M Brozek Jan J Oxman Andrew A Akl Elie A EA

CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne 20131216 3

<h4>Background</h4>Although several tools to evaluate the credibility of health care guidelines exist, guidance on practical steps for developing guidelines is lacking. We systematically compiled a comprehensive checklist of items linked to relevant resources and tools that guideline developers could consider, without the expectation that every guideline would address each item.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched data sources, including manuals of international guideline developers, literature on guidel ...[more]

PMID: 24344144

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA variety of systems have been developed to grade evidence and develop recommendations based on the available evidence. However, development of guidelines for medical tests is especially challenging given the typical indirectness of the evidence; direct evidence of the effects of testing on patient important outcomes is usually absent. We compared grading systems for medical tests on how they use evidence in guideline development.MethodsWe used a systematic strategy to look for grading systems specific to medical tests in PubMed, professional guideline websites, via personal correspondence, and handsearching back references of key articles. Using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument as a starting point, we defined two sets of characteristics to describe these systems: methodological and process ones. Methodological characteristics are features relating to how evidence is gathered, appraised, and used in recommendations. Process characteristics are those relating to the guideline development process. Data were extracted in duplicate and differences resolved through discussion.ResultsTwelve grading systems could be included. All varied in the degree to which methodological and process characteristics were addressed. Having a clinical scenario, identifying the care pathway and/or developing an analytical framework, having explicit criteria for appraising and linking indirect evidence, and having explicit methodologies for translating evidence into recommendations were least frequently addressed. Five systems at most addressed these, to varying degrees of explicitness and completeness. Process wise, features most frequently addressed included involvement of relevant professional groups (8/12), external peer review of completed guidelines (9/12), and recommendations on methods for dissemination (8/12). Characteristics least often addressed were whether the system was piloted (3/12) and funder information (3/12).ConclusionsFive systems for grading evidence about medical tests in guideline development addressed to differing degrees of explicitness the need for and appraisal of different bodies of evidence, the linking of such evidence, and its translation into recommendations. At present, no one system addressed the full complexity of gathering, assessing and linking different bodies of evidence.

Dataset Information

Guidelines 2.0: systematic development of a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise.

Background

Methods

Results

Interpretation

Publications

Guidelines 2.0: systematic development of a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets