When is good, good enough? Methodological pragmatism for sustainable guideline development

Implementation Science

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Browman, George P ^a   Somerfield, Mark R ^b   Lyman, Gary H ^c,d   Brouwers, Melissa C ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY   (United States)

^c USA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^e Escarpment Cancer Research Institute   (Canada)

Author keywords

Evidence based practice; Framework; Guideline development; Methodology

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PRACTICE; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; MANAGEMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; POLICY MAKING; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PRACTICE PATTERNS, PHYSICIANS';

EID: 84928734694     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17485908     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13012-015-0222-4     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Browman G, Brouwers M, Fervers B, Sawka C. Population based cancer control and the role of guidelines-towards a systems approach in cancer control. In: Cancer control, Editors: J.M. Elwood and S.B. Sutcliffe, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, Chapter 8, pp. 153-168, 2010.
2. Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, et al. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. CMAJ. 2010;182(18):E839-42.
3. Graham R, Mancher M, Wolman DM, Greenfield S, Steinberg E. Institute of Medicine report, Clinical practice guidelines we can trust. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2011.
4. Gagliardi A, Brouwers MC, Palda VA, Lemieux-Charles L, Grimshaw JM. How can we improve guideline use? A conceptual framework of implementability. Implement Sci. 2011;6:26.
5. Ransohoff DF, Pignone M, Sox HC. How to decide whether a clinical practice guideline is trustworthy. JAMA. 2013;309:139-40.
6. Qaseem A, Forland F, Macbeth F, Ollenschläger G, Phillips S, van der Wees P, et al. Guidelines International Network: toward international standards for clinical practice guidelines. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156:525-31.
7. Schünemann HJ, Wiercioch W, Etxeandia I, Falavigna M, Santesso N, Mustafa R, et al. Guidelines 2.0: systematic development of a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise. CMAJ. 2014;186:E123-42. First published December 16, 2013, doi: 10.1503/cmaj.131237.
8. Burgers JS, Grol R, Klazinga NS, Makela M, Zaat J. Towards evidence-based clinical practice: an international survey of 18 clinical guideline programs. Int J Qual Health Care. 2003;15(1):31-45.
9. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Haynes RB, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias: dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA. 1995;273:408-12.
10. Simon HA. Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychol Rev. 1956;63(2):129-38.
11. Bach J. Good enough quality: beyond the buzzword © 1997, IEEE Computer Society. (http://www.satisfice.com/articles/good_enough_quality.pdf) Accessed 18 June 2013.
12. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336(7650):924-6.
13. Shea BJ, Hamel C, Wells GA, Bouter LM, Kristjansson E, Grimshaw J, et al. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62 (10):1013-20.
14. Egger M, Zellweger-Zahner T, Schneider M, Junker C, Lengeler C, Antes G. Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet. 1997;350(9074):326-9.
15. Lyman GH, Kuderer NM. The strengths and limitations of meta-analyses based on aggregate data. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005;5:14.
16. Black N, Murphy M, Lamping D, McKee M, Sanderson C, Askham J, et al. Consensus development methods: a review of best practice in creating clinical guidelines. J Health Ser Res Pol. 1999;4(4):236-48.
17. Browman GP. Evidence-based clinical practice guideline development: principles, challenges, and accountability to evidence. J Surg Oncol. 2010;101(1):1-2.
18. Poonacha TK, Go RS. Level of scientific evidence underlying recommendations arising from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical practice guidelines. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(2):186-91.
19. Smith AJ, Driman DK, Spithoff K, Hunter A, McLeod RS, Simunovic M, et al. Guideline for optimization of colorectal cancer surgery and pathology. J Surg Oncol. 2010;101(1):5-12.