Methodological approaches for developing, reporting, and assessing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines: a systematic survey
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
OBJECTIVE: 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. 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. 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. 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.
