ArticleHealth research policy and systems2006
Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 1. Guidelines for guidelines.
Article in Health research policy and systems, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
59 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Relevance of Microvascular Flow Assessments in Critically Ill Neonates and Children: A Systematic Review.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2020Pooled it
- Guidelines for guideline developers: a systematic review of grading systems for medical tests.Implementation science : IS · 2013Pooled it
- Factors influencing the implementation of clinical guidelines for health care professionals: a systematic meta-review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2008Pooled it
- Methodological quality of nursing guidelines in China: an AGREE II and RIGHT appraisal (2023-2024).BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Conducting evidence synthesis and developing evidence-based advice in public health and beyond: A scoping review and map of methods guidance.Research synthesis methods · 2026Article
- Assessing the Quality of World Health Organisation Guidelines during Health Emergencies: A Domain-Based Analysis.Journal of epidemiology and global health · 2025Article
- An international guideline training and certification programme.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2025Article
- Guidance for engagement in health guideline development: A scoping review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Bringing experiences of healthcare in custody into quality improvement.Healthcare management forum · 2024Article
- Eating Disorders In weight-related Therapy (EDIT) Collaboration: rationale and study design.Nutrition research reviews · 2024Review
- The INGUIDE International Guideline Training and Certification Programme.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2024Article
- GRADE Concept 7: Issues and Insights Linking Guideline Recommendations to Trustworthy Essential Medicine Lists.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2024Article
- Improving prioritization processes for clinical practice guidelines: new methods and an evaluation from the National Heart Foundation of Australia.Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- Participatory development of a target policy profile to support soil-transmitted helminth elimination.Frontiers in health services · 2023Article
- Pharmacological Treatments for Localized Provoked Vulvodynia: A Scoping Review.International journal of sexual health : official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health · 2023Article
- Evidence-basing for quality improvement; bringing clinical practice guidelines closer to their promise of improving care practices.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2022Article
- Review
- Review
- Guideline development in harm reduction: Considerations around the meaningful involvement of people who access services.Drug and alcohol dependence reports · 2022Review
- PROTOCOL: Guidance for stakeholder engagement in guideline development: A systematic review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO), like many other organisations around the world, has recognised the need to use more rigorous processes to ensure that health care recommendations are informed by the best available research evidence. This is the first of a series of 16 reviews that have been prepared as background for advice from the WHO Advisory Committee on Health Research to WHO on how to achieve this.
objectivesWe reviewed the literature on guidelines for the development of guidelines.
methodsWe searched PubMed and three databases of methodological studies for existing systematic reviews and relevant methodological research. We did not conduct systematic reviews ourselves. Our conclusions are based on the available evidence, consideration of what WHO and other organisations are doing and logical arguments. KEY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS: We found no experimental research that compared different formats of guidelines for guidelines or studies that compared different components of guidelines for guidelines. However, there are many examples, surveys and other observational studies that compared the impact of different guideline development documents on guideline quality. WHAT HAVE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS DONE TO DEVELOP GUIDELINES FOR GUIDELINES FROM WHICH WHO CAN LEARN?: Establish a credible, independent committee that evaluates existing methods for developing guidelines or that updates existing ones. Obtain feedback and approval from various stakeholders during the development process of guidelines for guidelines. Develop a detailed source document (manual) that guideline developers can use as reference material. WHAT SHOULD BE THE KEY COMPONENTS OF WHO GUIDELINES FOR GUIDELINES?: Guidelines for guidelines should include information and instructions about the following components: 1) Priority setting; 2) Group composition and consultations; 3) Declaration and avoidance of conflicts of interest; 4) Group processes; 5) Identification of important outcomes; 6) Explicit definition of the questions and eligibility criteria ; 7) Type of study designs for different questions; 8) Identification of evidence; 9) Synthesis and presentation of evidence; 10) Specification and integration of values; 11) Making judgments about desirable and undesirable effects; 12) Taking account of equity; 13) Grading evidence and recommendations; 14) Taking account of costs; 15) Adaptation, applicability, transferability of guidelines; 16) Structure of reports; 17) Methods of peer review; 18) Planned methods of dissemination & implementation; 19) Evaluation of the guidelines. WHAT HAVE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS DONE TO IMPLEMENT GUIDELINES FOR GUIDELINES FROM WHICH WHO CAN LEARN?: Obtain buy-in from regions and country level representatives for guidelines for guidelines before dissemination of a revised version. Disseminate the guidelines for guidelines widely and make them available (e.g. on the Internet). Develop examples of guidelines that guideline developers can use as models when applying the guidelines for guidelines. Ensure training sessions for those responsible for developing guidelines. Continue to monitor the methodological literature on guideline development.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.