ReviewJournal of general internal medicine2009
How well do guidelines incorporate evidence on patient preferences?
Review in Journal of general internal medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 5 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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons guidelines development: patient engagement update to standard operating procedure.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Guideline
- Women's values and preferences on low-molecular-weight heparin and pregnancy: a mixed-methods systematic review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Patient-centered care for older adults with multiple chronic conditions: a stepwise approach from the American Geriatrics Society: American Geriatrics Society Expert Panel on the Care of Older Adults with Multimorbidity.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2012Guideline
- Guiding principles for the care of older adults with multimorbidity: an approach for clinicians: American Geriatrics Society Expert Panel on the Care of Older Adults with Multimorbidity.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2012Guideline
- Implementation and effectiveness of integrated trauma and addiction treatment for incarcerated men.Journal of anxiety disorders · 2015Trial
- Patient Preferences in Anticoagulation Treatment: A Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.The patient · 2026Review
- Clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: an assessment based on the AGREE II, AGREE-REX tools and the RIGHT checklist.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- How supermarket retailers value business outcomes of healthy food retail strategies: a discrete choice experiment.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- "You Can See the Connections": Facilitating Visualization of Care Priorities in People Living with Multiple Chronic Health Conditions.Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2023Article
- The International Guideline Evaluation Screening Tool (IGEST): development and validation.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- Hope for "Continued Vitality": Qualitative Study of Adults With Traumatic Brain Injury and Low Mood on Their Rehabilitation.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2022Article
- Creation and provision of a question and answer resource for esophageal cancer based on medical professionals' reports of patients' and families' views and preferences.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2021Article
- And When I Die: Theory of Planned Behavior as Applied to Sperm Cryopreservation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- New Approach for Collecting Cancer Patients' Views and Preferences Through Medical Staff.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Article
- Status and Recommendations of Technological and Data-Driven Innovations in Cancer Care: Focus Group Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Stakeholders' preferences for osteoarthritis interventions in health services: A cross-sectional study using multi-criteria decision analysis.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2020Article
- Perceptions and preferences for long-acting injectable and implantable medications in comparison to short-acting medications for opioid use disorders.Journal of substance abuse treatment · 2020Article
- Article
- Role of patient preferences in clinical practice guidelines: a multiple methods study using guidelines from oncology as a case.BMJ open · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical practice guidelines (CPG) are meant to consider important values such as patient preferences.
objectiveTo assess how well clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) integrate evidence on patient preferences compared with that on treatment effectiveness.
designA cross-sectional review of a listing in 2006 of CPGs judged to be the best in their fields by an external joint government and medical association body. STUDY SELECTION: Exclusion criterion was unavailability in electronic format. Sixty-five of 71 listed CPGs met selection criteria. MEASUREMENTS: Two instruments originally constructed to evaluate the overall quality of CPGs were adapted to specifically assess the quality of integrating information on patient preference vs. treatment effectiveness. Counts of words and references in each CPG associated with patient preferences vs. treatment effectiveness were performed. Two reviewers independently assessed each CPG. MAIN
resultsBased on our adapted instruments, CPGs scored significantly higher (p < 0.001) on the quality of integrating treatment effectiveness compared with patient preferences evidence (mean instrument one scores on a scale of 0.25 to 1.00: 0.65 vs. 0.43; mean instrument two scores on a scale of 0 to 1: 0.58 vs. 0.18). The average percentage of the total word count dedicated to treatment effectiveness was 24.2% compared with 4.6% for patient preferences. The average percentage of references citing treatment effectiveness evidence was 36.6% compared with 6.0% for patient preferences.
conclusionHigh quality CPGs poorly integrate evidence on patient preferences. Barriers to incorporating preference evidence into CPGs should be addressed.
Indexed as
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.