ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2007
Adding "value" to clinical practice guidelines.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- Incorporation of Shared Decision-Making in International Cardiovascular Guidelines, 2012-2022.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Assessing the Quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region: A Systematic Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2021Article
- Role of patient preferences in clinical practice guidelines: a multiple methods study using guidelines from oncology as a case.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Evidence of patient beliefs, values, and preferences is not provided in osteoporosis clinical practice guidelines.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2019Review
- Wise guidance and its challenges: the new Canadian recommendations on breast cancer screening.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2018Article
- Evidence to Decision framework provides a structured "roadmap" for making GRADE guidelines recommendations.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2018Article
- Engaging cancer patients in clinical practice guideline development: a pilot study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2018Article
- Disseminating the Results of a Depression Management Study in an Urban Alaska Native Health Care System.American Indian and Alaska native mental health research (Online) · 2018Article
- What distinguishes a competent doctor in medical education?International journal of medical education · 2017Article
- Understanding optimal approaches to patient and caregiver engagement in the development of cancer practice guidelines: a mixed methods study.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- [D'autres façons de savoir: L'analyse critique du discours pour réexaminer la collaboration intraprofessionnelle].Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2016Article
- Other ways of knowing: Using critical discourse analysis to reexamine intraprofessional collaboration.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2016Article
- Expanding a First-Order Logic Mitigation Framework to Handle Multimorbid Patient Preferences.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2015Article
- Contributors to primary care guidelines: What are their professions and how many of them have conflicts of interest?Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2015Article
- Guideline adherence for the treatment of advanced schistosomiasis japonica in Hubei, China.Parasitology research · 2014Article
- Effectiveness of oral bisphosphonates for primary prevention of osteoporotic fractures: evidence from the AIFA-BEST observational study.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2014Observational
- Should all elderly women receive bisphosphonates to prevent osteoporotic fractures?The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy · 2012Article
- How applicable are clinical practice guidelines to elderly patients with comorbidities?Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2011Review
- Decision to take osteoporosis medication in patients who have had a fracture and are 'high' risk for future fracture: a qualitative study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2011Article
- How to integrate individual patient values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines? A research protocol.Implementation science : IS · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the degree to which current Canadian clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for common chronic conditions (ie, diabetes, dyslipidemias, hypertension, and osteoporosis) discuss the importance of patients' values and preferences in therapeutic decision making, and provide quantitative information that would allow for comprehensive shared informed decision making.
designRetrospective, observational review.
main outcome measuresThe presence or absence of specific mentions of the importance of incorporating patients' values and preferences into therapeutic decision making; the number and type (relative or absolute) of quantitative descriptions of benefit or harm; the number of interventions for which a means of quantitatively determining the probability that an individual patient will experience an end point without and with implementation of the therapeutic intervention; and the number of descriptions of specific or comparative costs of treatment.
resultsThree of 5 CPGs mentioned that patients' values or preferences should influence treatment decisions. None of the CPGs recommended that benefits and harms of therapies be discussed with patients. Of the 63 quantitative mentions of therapeutic effects of interventions, 81%were presented using relative terms and 19% met our criteria for applicability to decision making for individual patients. Two of the 5 CPGs did not enumerate any harms. Three of the 5 CPGs made no mention of cost.
conclusionFive prominent Canadian CPGs paid little attention to the issue of patients' values and preferences in therapeutic decision making, even though these issues are fundamental tenets of evidence-based practice. These 5 CPGs provided limited quantitative information on benefits and harms and therefore could not be used by clinicians to truly involve patients in informed decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17872848PMC1949258What 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.