ArticleBMJ open2016
Barriers to making recommendations about medical tests: a qualitative study of European guideline developers.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Do clinical practice guidelines consider evidence about diagnostic test consequences on patient-relevant outcomes? A critical document analysis.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2022Pooled it
- Point-of-care viral load tests to detect high HIV viral load in people living with HIV/AIDS attending health facilities.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Co-creation of a step-by-step guide for specifying the test-management pathway to formulate focused guideline questions about healthcare related tests.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Computer-Aided Detection During Active Case Finding for Pulmonary Tuberculosis in Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Patient-centred outcomes of imaging tests: recommendations for patients, clinicians and researchers.BMJ quality & safety · 2023Article
- Defining the clinical pathway in cochrane diagnostic test accuracy reviews.BMC medical research methodology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDevelopment of medical test guidelines differs from intervention guideline development. These differences can pose unique challenges in building evidence-based recommendations to guide clinical practice. The aim of our study was to better understand these challenges, explore reasons behind them and identify possible solutions. SETTING AND
participantsIn this qualitative study, we conducted in-depth interviews between February 2012 and April 2013 of a convenience sample of 17 European guideline developers experienced in medical test guideline development. OUTCOMES MEASURED: We used framework analysis with deductive and inductive approaches to generate the themes from the interviews. We kept interpretation grounded in the data.
resultsGuideline developers acknowledged that inclusion of patient important outcomes in their guideline development was necessary but lacking. This and other challenges raised fell into 3 broad and overlapping domains: methodological issues, resource limitations and a lack of awareness on the need for evidence that links testing to patient outcomes. Education was mentioned as a key solution to increase awareness and address the resources limitations mentioned.
conclusionsChallenges guideline developers face were interlinked across the domains of methodological issues, resource limitations and a lack of awareness. Solutions that addressed these challenges in parallel are needed. Raising awareness, education and training of relevant stakeholders such as medical doctors, funders and regulators to look beyond test accuracy is key to having a long-term resolution to the issues faced in medical test guideline development.
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.