Development, implementation and validation of resource-stratified guidelines in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review protocol.
international health services
protocols & guidelines
quality in health care
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 09 2022
28 09 2022
Historique:
entrez:
28
9
2022
pubmed:
29
9
2022
medline:
1
10
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Nearly every field of medicine has some form of clinical practice guidelines. However, only within the past 5-10 years has the medical community acknowledged the need for well-developed guidelines tailored to the local healthcare needs and the resources available. In most low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), healthcare workers depend on guidelines developed in high-income countries (HICs), yet many interventions validated in a HIC are ineffective when implemented in an LMIC. The variation in infrastructure, medical personnel, technology and environmental conditions exhibited in LMICs relative to HICs necessitates a careful appraisal of the evidence base used in clinical guideline recommendations. This review aims to map the use of resource-stratified guidelines across all fields of medicine. The review seeks to answer three questions for the identified guidelines: (1) what was the method of development, (2) have they been implemented and, if so, (3) have they been validated. The search strategy will aim to locate studies from inception to November 2021. An initial limited search of PubMed and Scopus was undertaken to identify articles on the topic. The text words contained in the titles and abstracts of relevant articles, and the index terms used to describe the articles were used to develop a full search strategy for PubMed and Scopus. This scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for scoping reviews. Data to be extracted from each study will include population characteristics of both developers and intended implementation population, medical specialty, validation status, method of guideline development, whether the study is consensus or evidence-based in addition to a summary of recommendations for practice. Ethical approval is not required for this review. The plan for dissemination is to publish review findings in a peer-reviewed journal.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36171036
pii: bmjopen-2021-059603
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059603
pmc: PMC9528583
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e059603Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
J Glob Oncol. 2018 Jul;4:1-8
pubmed: 30110223
J Trauma. 1998 May;44(5):804-12; discussion 812-4
pubmed: 9603081
Breast J. 2003 May-Jun;9 Suppl 2:S42-50
pubmed: 12713496
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2016 Aug;14(8):961-9
pubmed: 27496112
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2007 Mar;5(3):349-56
pubmed: 17439764
Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2006 Jan;3(1):4-5
pubmed: 16407859
Cancer. 2008 Oct 15;113(8 Suppl):2221-43
pubmed: 18816619
JAMA. 2004 Jun 2;291(21):2639-41
pubmed: 15173158
Milbank Q. 2007 Dec;85(4):691-727
pubmed: 18070334
Breast J. 2006 Jan-Feb;12 Suppl 1:S54-69
pubmed: 16430399
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015 Sep;13(3):141-6
pubmed: 26134548
BMJ Open. 2015 Sep 25;5(9):e008932
pubmed: 26408831
Lancet Oncol. 2012 Nov;13(11):e470-81
pubmed: 23117002
Br J Haematol. 2017 Jun;177(6):846-854
pubmed: 28295193
Breast J. 2006 Jan-Feb;12 Suppl 1:S3-15
pubmed: 16430397