Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25608684›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2015

Addressing implementation challenges during guideline development - a case study of Swedish national guidelines for methods of preventing disease.

Linda Richter-Sundberg, Therese Kardakis, Lars Weinehall, Rickard Garvare, Monica E Nyström

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Linda Richter-SundbergDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University, SE 90185, Umeå, Sweden. linda.sundberg@epiph.umu.se.
Therese KardakisDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University, SE 90185, Umeå, Sweden. therese.kardakis@ki.se.
Lars WeinehallDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University, SE 90185, Umeå, Sweden. lars.weinehall@epiph.umu.se.
Rickard GarvareDepartment of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Luleå University of Technology, SE 971 87, Luleå, Sweden. rickard.garvare@ltu.se.
Monica E NyströmDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University, SE 90185, Umeå, Sweden. monica.nystrom@ki.se.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany of the world's life threatening diseases (e.g. cancer, heart disease, stroke) could be prevented by eliminating life-style habits such as tobacco use, unhealthy diet, physical inactivity and excessive alcohol use. Incorporating evidence-based research on methods to change unhealthy lifestyle habits in clinical practice would be equally valuable. However gaps between guideline development and implementation are well documented, with implications for health care quality, safety and effectiveness. The development phase of guidelines has been shown to be important both for the quality in guideline content and for the success of implementation. There are, however, indications that guidelines related to general disease prevention methods encounter specific barriers compared to guidelines that are diagnosis-specific. In 2011 the Swedish National board for Health and Welfare launched guidelines with a preventive scope. The aim of this study was to investigate how implementation challenges were addressed during the development process of these disease preventive guidelines.

methodsSeven semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of the guideline development management group. Archival data detailing the guideline development process were also collected and used in the analysis. Qualitative data were analysed using content analysis as the analytical framework.

resultsThe study identified several strategies and approaches that were used to address implementation challenges during guideline development. Four themes emerged from the analysis: broad agreements and consensus about scope and purpose; a formalized and structured development procedure; systematic and active involvement of stakeholders; and openness and transparency in the specific guideline development procedure. Additional factors concerning the scope of prevention and the work environment of guideline developers were perceived to influence the possibilities to address implementation issues.

conclusionsThis case study provides examples of how guideline developers perceive and approach the issue of implementation during the development and early launch of prevention guidelines. Models for guideline development could benefit from an initial assessment of how the guideline topic, its target context and stakeholders will affect the upcoming implementation.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicAdultConsensusEvidence-Based PracticeHealth PromotionHumansPreventive Health ServicesQuality of Health CareRisk Reduction BehaviorSweden

Identifiers

PMID25608684
PMCPMC4308005

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.