Dataset Information

Hepatitis C Guidance 2018 Update: AASLD-IDSA Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C Virus Infection.

ABSTRACT: Recognizing the importance of timely guidance regarding the rapidly evolving field of hepatitis C management, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) developed a web-based process for the expeditious formulation and dissemination of evidence-based recommendations. Launched in 2014, the hepatitis C virus (HCV) guidance website undergoes periodic updates as necessitated by availability of new therapeutic agents and/or research data. A major update was released electronically in September 2017, prompted primarily by approval of new direct-acting antiviral agents and expansion of the guidance's scope. This update summarizes the latest release of the HCV guidance and focuses on new or amended recommendations since the previous September 2015 print publication. The recommendations herein were developed by volunteer hepatology and infectious disease experts representing AASLD and IDSA and have been peer reviewed and approved by each society's governing board.

SUBMITTER: AASLD-IDSA HCV Guidance Panel

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7190892 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Hepatitis C Guidance 2018 Update: AASLD-IDSA Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C Virus Infection.

Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 20181001 10

Recognizing the importance of timely guidance regarding the rapidly evolving field of hepatitis C management, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) developed a web-based process for the expeditious formulation and dissemination of evidence-based recommendations. Launched in 2014, the hepatitis C virus (HCV) guidance website undergoes periodic updates as necessitated by availability of new therapeutic agents and/or r ...[more]

PMID: 30215672

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundReaching the therapeutic target of remission or low-disease activity has improved outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) significantly. The treat-to-target recommendations, formulated in 2010, have provided a basis for implementation of a strategic approach towards this therapeutic goal in routine clinical practice, but these recommendations need to be re-evaluated for appropriateness and practicability in the light of new insights.ObjectiveTo update the 2010 treat-to-target recommendations based on systematic literature reviews (SLR) and expert opinion.MethodsA task force of rheumatologists, patients and a nurse specialist assessed the SLR results and evaluated the individual items of the 2010 recommendations accordingly, reformulating many of the items. These were subsequently discussed, amended and voted upon by >40 experts, including 5 patients, from various regions of the world. Levels of evidence, strengths of recommendations and levels of agreement were derived.ResultsThe update resulted in 4 overarching principles and 10 recommendations. The previous recommendations were partly adapted and their order changed as deemed appropriate in terms of importance in the view of the experts. The SLR had now provided also data for the effectiveness of targeting low-disease activity or remission in established rather than only early disease. The role of comorbidities, including their potential to preclude treatment intensification, was highlighted more strongly than before. The treatment aim was again defined as remission with low-disease activity being an alternative goal especially in patients with long-standing disease. Regular follow-up (every 1-3 months during active disease) with according therapeutic adaptations to reach the desired state was recommended. Follow-up examinations ought to employ composite measures of disease activity that include joint counts. Additional items provide further details for particular aspects of the disease, especially comorbidity and shared decision-making with the patient. Levels of evidence had increased for many items compared with the 2010 recommendations, and levels of agreement were very high for most of the individual recommendations (?9/10).ConclusionsThe 4 overarching principles and 10 recommendations are based on stronger evidence than before and are supposed to inform patients, rheumatologists and other stakeholders about strategies to reach optimal outcomes of RA.

Project description:BackgroundTesting used in screening, diagnosis and follow-up of COVID-19 has been a subject of debate. Several organisations have developed formal advice about testing for COVID-19 to assist in the control of the disease. We collated, delineated and appraised current worldwide recommendations about the role and applications of tests to control SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19.MethodsWe searched for documents providing recommendations for COVID-19 testing in PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, the Coronavirus Open Access Project living evidence database and relevant websites such as TRIP database, ECRI Guidelines Trust, the GIN database, from inception to 21 September 2020. Two reviewers applied the eligibility criteria to potentially relevant citations without language or geographical restrictions. We extracted data in duplicate, including assessment of methodological quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II tool.ResultsWe included 47 relevant documents and 327 recommendations about testing. Regarding the quality of the documents, we found that the domains with the lowest scores were 'Editorial independence' (Median=4%) and 'Applicability' (Median=6%). Only six documents obtained at least 50% score for the 'Rigour of development' domain. An important number of recommendations focused on the diagnosis of suspected cases (48%) and deisolation measures (11%). The most frequently recommended test was the reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) assay (87 recommendations) and the chest CT (38 recommendations). There were 22 areas of agreement among guidance developers, including the use of RT-PCR for SARS-Cov-2 confirmation, the limited role of bronchoscopy, the use chest CT and chest X-rays for grading severity and the co-assessment for other respiratory pathogens.ConclusionThis first scoping review of recommendations for COVID-19 testing showed many limitations in the methodological quality of included guidance documents that could affect the confidence of clinicians in their implementation. Future guidance documents should incorporate a minimum set of key methodological characteristics to enhance their applicability for decision making.

Project description:The purpose of the European Stroke Organisation-Karolinska Stroke Update Conference is to provide updates on recent stroke therapy research and to give an opportunity for the participants to discuss how these results may be implemented into clinical routine. The meeting started 22 years ago as Karolinska Stroke Update, but since 2014 it is a joint conference with European Stroke Organisation. Importantly, it provides a platform for discussion on the European Stroke Organisation guidelines process and on recommendations to the European Stroke Organisation guidelines committee on specific topics. By this, it adds a direct influence from stroke professionals otherwise not involved in committees and work groups on the guideline procedure. The discussions at the conference may also inspire new guidelines when motivated. The topics raised at the meeting are selected by the scientific programme committee mainly based on recent important scientific publications. This year's European Stroke Organisation-Karolinska Stroke Update Meeting was held in Stockholm on 11-13 November 2018. There were 11 scientific sessions discussed in the meeting including two short sessions. Each session except the short sessions produced a consensus statement (Full version with background, issues, conclusions and references are published as web-material and at www.eso-karolinska.org and http://eso-stroke.org) and recommendations which were prepared by a writing committee consisting of session chair(s), scientific secretary and speakers. These statements were presented to the 250 participants of the meeting. In the open meeting, general participants commented on the consensus statement and recommendations and the final document were adjusted based on the discussion from the general participants Recommendations (grade of evidence) were graded according to the 1998 Karolinska Stroke Update meeting with regard to the strength of evidence. Grade A Evidence: Strong support from randomised controlled trials and statistical reviews (at least one randomised controlled trial plus one statistical review). Grade B Evidence: Support from randomised controlled trials and statistical reviews (one randomised controlled trial or one statistical review). Grade C Evidence: No reasonable support from randomised controlled trials, recommendations based on small randomised and/or non-randomised controlled trials evidence.

Dataset Information

Hepatitis C Guidance 2018 Update: AASLD-IDSA Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C Virus Infection.

Publications

Hepatitis C Guidance 2018 Update: AASLD-IDSA Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C Virus Infection.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets