TitleMethodological approaches for developing, reporting, and assessing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines: a systematic survey
AuthorsYao, Xiaomei
Xia, Jun
Jin, Yinghui
Shen, Quan
Wang, Qi
Zhu, Ying
McNair, Sheila
Sussman, Jonathan
Wang, Zhiwen
Florez, Ivan D.
Zeng, Xian-Tao
Brouwers, Melissa
AffiliationMcMaster Univ, Dept Oncol, Hamilton, ON, Canada
McMaster Univ, Dept Hlth Res Methods Evidence & Impact, Hamilton, ON, Canada
Children S Hosp Fudan Univ, Ctr Clin Practice Guideline Conduct & Evaluat, Shanghai, Peoples R China
Univ Nottingham Ningbo, Nottingham Ningbo GRADE Ctr, Ningbo, Zhejiang, Peoples R China
Univ Nottingham, Sch Med, Nottingham, England
Wuhan Univ, Ctr Evidence Based & Translat Med, Zhongnan Hosp, Wuhan 430071, Hubei, Peoples R China
Wuhan Univ, Sch Hlth Sci, Wuhan, Hubei, Peoples R China
Peking Univ, Hlth Sci Ctr Evidence Based Nursing, Sch Nursing, Beijing, Peoples R China
Univ Antioquia, Dept Pediat, Colombia Calle 67,53-108, Medellin 0500001, Colombia
McMaster Univ, Sch Rehabil Sci, Hamilton, ON, Canada
Univ Ottawa, Sch Epidemiol & Publ Hlth, Ottawa, ON, Canada
KeywordsTRUSTWORTHY RECOMMENDATIONS
HEALTH-CARE
AGREE II
ADAPTATION
QUALITY
TOOL
Issue DateJun-2022
PublisherJOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
AbstractObjective: To produce a mapping and feature summary of approaches and tools available for the clinical practice guideline (CPG) community to develop, report, or assess four types of CPGs: (1) Standard original (or de novo) CPGs, (2) Rapid original CPGs, (3) Adapted/adopted CPGs, and (4) Updated CPGs.& nbsp;Study design: The systematic literature search was conducted using Embase and PubMed, covering the period from January 2010 to October 13, 2020. Two websites that collect and recommend approaches/tools to develop, report, or assess CPGs were also searched: Guidelines International Network and Equator Network. We screened the search results to include methodological papers that aimed to develop specific approaches/tools to develop, report, or assess any of the aforementioned four CPG types.& nbsp;Results: Among 10,581 citations, 46 papers reporting 46 approaches/tools were included. Of these 46 approaches/tools, 33 were about CPG development, seven were for CPG reporting, and six for CPG assessment. Among the 33 development approaches/tools, 26 did not state usability or validity information; but nine from 13 reporting or assessment approaches/tools did.& nbsp;Conclusions: This study provides an overall summary of the currently available approaches/tools, which serves to improve users' understanding to pave the way for informed choice and application. (C) 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11897/643284
ISSN0895-4356
DOI10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.02.015
IndexedSCI(E)
Appears in Collections:医学部待认领

Files in This Work
There are no files associated with this item.

Web of Science®



Checked on Last Week

Scopus®



Checked on Current Time

百度学术™



Checked on Current Time

Google Scholar™





License: See PKU IR operational policies.