ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2017
Public consultation changes guidance on the use of health-care interventions. An observational study.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Protocol: Assessing the impact of interest-holder engagement on guideline development: A systematic review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the responses to public consultation on draft guidance on interventional procedures (IP) for the UK National Health Services, and the changes made as a result of consultation.
designRetrospective review of responses received during public consultation for 183 pieces of draft guidance, and subsequent changes made.
settingThe National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the UK. Guidance produced December 2009-December 2014.
main outcome measuresNumbers (%) of public consultations receiving responses, and resulting changes made to draft guidance.
resultsResponses were received during 159 (86.9%) periods of public consultation, from a total of 853 people or organizations (median number per consultation 3; range 0-82; interquartile range 1-5). Changes were made to draft guidance following 136 (74.3%) consultations. These changes were to the category (2.7%) or wording (8.7%) of the main recommendation; to other recommendations (about consent, patient selection, training and future research) (31.1%); and to other sections of guidance (description of the procedure and of the evidence on its efficacy and safety) (70.5%). Additional published evidence was proffered for 22.4%. Health-care professionals or their specialist societies were the most frequent responders to consultation (68.8%), patients or patient organizations accounted for 22.4% and medical device companies accounted for 8.8%.
conclusionsThis study shows substantial engagement with public consultation and frequent changes made to draft guidance as a result. These findings are likely to be relevant to other areas of health-care and national policymaking that seek to be responsive to their stakeholders.
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.