Dataset Information

Endorsement of clinical practice guidelines: Criteria from the College of Family Physicians of Canada.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To refine the process for endorsement of guidelines and establish the expectations of the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC) regarding the quality and relevance of clinical practice guidelines targeting family physicians and their patients.

Composition of the committee

Initially, a group of 6 CFPC staff and selected College members reviewed the previous process for endorsement with the aim of providing a new direction, if needed. The work was then assumed by the Guideline and Knowledge Translation Expert Working Group, a purposefully selected group of 9 family physicians from across Canada with expertise in research, evidence, guidelines, knowledge translation, and continuing professional development and education.

Methods

The initial task force reviewed the endorsement process and identified areas for improvement. A draft new process and core criteria for high-quality guidelines were developed. This was approved by the CFPC board. A Guideline and Knowledge Translation Expert Working Group was then formed to further refine the process and the criteria. Multiple resources were used to inform the criteria. The Guideline and Knowledge Translation Expert Working Group will manage the endorsement process of external submitted guidelines, as well as provide high-level guidance to the CFPC regarding in-house guidelines and continuing professional development content.

Report

This article provides the expectations of the CFPC regarding clinical practice guidelines and describes in detail the process and criteria for endorsement. Key principles include family physician involvement and guideline funding unlikely to introduce bias, with most criteria falling under 4 themed areas: relation to family medicine, CFPC values, patient engagement and decision making, and scientific rigour. The Guideline and Knowledge Translation Expert Working Group will report to the CFPC board at least once a year. It is hoped that this fully transparent process and these criteria will help advance the quality and standards of clinical practice guideline production in Canada.

Conclusion

A comprehensive but reasonable list has been provided that reflects the best standards and recommendations and is consistent with the CFPC's values while recognizing the landscape of guideline development for its national partners and colleagues. As with all processes, careful consideration and evaluation will be essential.

SUBMITTER: Allan GM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8279665 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWhile shared decision making (SDM) and adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are important, some believe they are incompatible. This study explored the mutual influence between physicians' intention to engage in SDM and their intention to follow CPGs.MethodsEmbedded within a clustered randomized trial to assess the impact of training physicians in SDM about using antibiotics to treat acute respiratory tract infections, this study evaluated physicians' intentions to both engage in SDM and follow CPGs. A self-administered questionnaire based on the theory of planned behavior evaluated both behavioral intentions and their respective determinants (attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control) at study entry and exit. We used path analysis to explore the relationships between the intentions. We conducted statistical analyses using the maximum likelihood method and the variance-covariance matrix. Goodness of fit indices encompassed the chi-square statistic, the comparative fit index and the root mean square error of approximation.ResultsWe analyzed 244 responses at entry and 236 at exit. In the control group, at entry we observed that physicians' intention to engage in SDM (r?=?0, t?=?0.03) did not affect their intention to follow CPGs; however, their intention to follow CPGs (r?=?-0.31 t?=?-2.82) did negatively influence their intention to engage in SDM. At exit, neither behavioral intention influenced the other. In the experimental group, at entry neither behavioral intention influenced the other; at exit, the intention to engage in SDM still did not influence the intention to use CPGs, although the intention to follow CPGs (r?=?-0.15 t?=?-2.02) slightly negatively influenced the intention to engage in SDM, but this was not clinically significant.ConclusionPhysicians' intention to engage in SDM does not affect their intention to adopt CPGs even after SDM training. Physicians' intention to adopt CPGs had no clinically significant influence on intention to engage in SDM.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01116076.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence-based medicine has broadened its scope and is starting to reach insurance medicine. Although still in its initial stages, physicians in the area of insurance medicine should keep up-to-date with the evidence on various diseases in order to correctly assess disability and to give appropriate advice about health care reimbursement. In order to explore future opportunities of evidence-based medicine to improve daily insurance medicine, there is a need for qualitative studies to better understand insurance physicians' perceptions of EBM. The present study was designed to identify the attitude of insurance physicians towards evidence-based medicine and clinical practice guidelines, and to determine their ability to access, retrieve and appraise the health evidence and the barriers for applying evidence to practice.MethodsA cross-sectional survey study was carried out among all Dutch-speaking insurance physicians employed at one of the six Belgian social insurance sickness funds and at the National Institute of Disability and Health care Insurance (n = 224). Chi-square tests were used to compare nominal and ordinal variables. Student's t-tests, ANOVA, Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis were used to compare means of continuous variables for different groups.ResultsThe response rate was 48.7%. The majority of respondents were positive towards evidence-based medicine and clinical practice guidelines. Their knowledge of EBM was rather poor. Perceived barriers for applying evidence to practice were mainly time and lack of EBM skills.ConclusionAlthough the majority of physicians were positive towards EBM and welcomed more guidelines, the use of evidence and clinical practice guidelines in insurance medicine is low at present. It is in the first place important to eradicate the perceived inertia which limits the use of EBM and to further investigate the EBM principles in the context of insurance medicine. Available high-quality evidence-based resources (at the moment mainly originating from other medical fields) need to be structured in a way that is useful for insurance physicians and global access to this information needs to be ensured.