Evidence to decision frameworks enabled structured and explicit development of healthcare recommendations.

Certainty of evidence Clinical practice guidelines Decision making Evidence synthesis Evidence-based practice Evidence-to-decision framework GRADE Health recommendations Methods Practice guidelines Systematic reviews

Journal

Journal of clinical epidemiology
ISSN: 1878-5921
Titre abrégé: J Clin Epidemiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8801383

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
10 2022
Historique:
received: 02 03 2022
revised: 06 05 2022
accepted: 07 06 2022
pubmed: 17 6 2022
medline: 17 12 2022
entrez: 16 6 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The aim of this study is to identify and describe the processes suggested for the formulation of healthcare recommendations in healthcare guidelines available in guidance documents. We searched international databases in May 2020 to retrieve guidance documents published by organizations dedicated to guideline development. Pairs of researchers independently selected and extracted data about the characteristics of the guidance document, including explicit or implicit recommendation-related criteria and processes considered, as well as the use of evidence to decision (EtD) frameworks. We included 68 guidance documents. Most organizations reported a system for grading the strength of recommendations (88%), half of them being the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Two out of three guidance documents (66%) proposed the use of a framework to guide the EtD process. The GRADE-EtD framework was the most often reported framework (19 organizations, 42%), whereas 20 organizations (44%) proposed their own multicriteria frameworks. Using any EtD framework was related with a more comprehensive set of recommendation-related criteria compared to no framework, especially for criteria like values, equity, and acceptability. Although limited, the use of EtD frameworks was associated with the inclusion of relevant recommendation criteria. Among the EtD structured frameworks, the GRADE-EtD framework offers the most comprehensive perspective for evidence-informed decision-making processes.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35710054
pii: S0895-4356(22)00150-0
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.06.004
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

51-62

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Jose F Meneses-Echavez (JF)

Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway; Facultad de Cultura Física, Deporte y Recreación. Universidad Santo Tomás, Bogotá, Colombia. Electronic address: jose.meneses@fhi.no.

Julia Bidonde (J)

Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway; School of Rehabilitation Science, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Canada.

Juan Jose Yepes-Nuñez (JJ)

Universidad de los Andes, School of Medicine, Bogotá, Colombia; Pulmonology Service, Internal Medicine Section, Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá University Hospital, Bogotá, Colombia.

Tina Poklepović Peričić (T)

Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia.

Livia Puljak (L)

Center for Evidence-Based Medicine and Health Care, Catholic University of Croatia, Zagreb, Croatia.

Malgorzata M Bala (MM)

Chair of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Department of Hygiene and Dietetics, Systematic Reviews Unit, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.

Dawid Storman (D)

Chair of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Department of Hygiene and Dietetics, Systematic Reviews Unit, Department of Adult Psychiatry, University Hospital Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.

Mateusz J Swierz (MJ)

Chair of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Department of Hygiene and Dietetics, Systematic Reviews Unit, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.

Joanna Zając (J)

Chair of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Department of Hygiene and Dietetics, Systematic Reviews Unit, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.

Camila Montesinos-Guevara (C)

Centro de Investigación en Salud Pública y Epidemiología Clínica (CISPEC), Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud Eugenio Espejo, Universidad UTE, Quito, Ecuador.

Yuan Zhang (Y)

Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Nathaly Chavez Guapo (N)

Facultad de Enfermería y Rehabilitación, Programa de Fisioterapia, Universidad de la Sabana, Chía, Colombia.

Holger Schünemann (H)

Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Signe Flottorp (S)

Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Pablo Alonso-Coello (P)

Iberoamerican Cochrane Center, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau-CIBERESP), Barcelona, Spain.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH