Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30005710›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2018

Development of rapid guidelines: 2. A qualitative study with WHO guideline developers.

Ivan D Florez, Rebecca L Morgan, Maicon Falavigna, Sérgio C Kowalski, Yuan Zhang, Itziar Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta, Nancy Santesso, Wojtek Wiercioch, Holger J Schünemann

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

9 authors.

Ivan D FlorezDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact and Mac GRADE Center, McMaster University Health Sciences Centre, Room 2C16, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8N 4K1, Canada.
Rebecca L MorganDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact and Mac GRADE Center, McMaster University Health Sciences Centre, Room 2C16, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8N 4K1, Canada.
Maicon FalavignaHospital Moinhos de Vento, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Sérgio C KowalskiDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact and Mac GRADE Center, McMaster University Health Sciences Centre, Room 2C16, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8N 4K1, Canada.
Yuan ZhangDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact and Mac GRADE Center, McMaster University Health Sciences Centre, Room 2C16, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8N 4K1, Canada.
Itziar Etxeandia-IkobaltzetaDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact and Mac GRADE Center, McMaster University Health Sciences Centre, Room 2C16, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8N 4K1, Canada.
Nancy SantessoDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact and Mac GRADE Center, McMaster University Health Sciences Centre, Room 2C16, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8N 4K1, Canada.
Wojtek WierciochDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact and Mac GRADE Center, McMaster University Health Sciences Centre, Room 2C16, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8N 4K1, Canada.
Holger J SchünemannDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact and Mac GRADE Center, McMaster University Health Sciences Centre, Room 2C16, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON, L8N 4K1, Canada. schuneh@mcmaster.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSituations such as public health emergencies and outbreaks necessitate the development and publication of high-quality recommendations within a condensed timeframe. For example, WHO has produced examples of and guidance for the development of rapid guidelines (RGs). However, more information is needed to understand the experiences and perceptions of guideline developers. This is the second of a series of three articles addressing methodological issues around RGs. This study describes the perceptions and experiences of guideline developers at WHO about RGs.

methodsWe conducted interviews consisting of open- and closed-ended questions with guideline developers at WHO. Our analysis described the definition and rationale of RGs, the differences from regular guidelines with regard to timelines from topic definition until publication, barriers to identifying the evidence and the lack of a standard methodology to develop RGs.

resultsWe interviewed 10 participants, the majority of whom were comfortable with the current WHO definition of RGs. Most stated that the rationale for developing RGs should be in response to new evidence about efficacy, cost-effectiveness or safety. Respondents differed with regards to the amount of time RGs should take. While the majority of participants agreed that guidelines should be based on a systematic review, this step in the process was considered the most time and resource intensive. Challenges for developing RGs included limited personnel and financial resources as well as the lack of evidence. Facilitators, in turn, that may improve RG development include additional financial and personnel resources as well as the use of virtual meetings.

conclusionsWhile our study suggests a strong need and rationale for the development of RGs, standardisation of timelines and guidance on panel composition, peer-review process, conduct of meetings and sources of permissible evidence require further research.

Indexed as

Administrative PersonnelDisease OutbreaksEmergenciesEvidence-Based MedicineInformation DisseminationPractice Guidelines as TopicPublic HealthAttitudeCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision MakingDelivery of Health CareHealth ResourcesHumansPolicy MakingQualitative ResearchWorld Health OrganizationClinical guidelinesEmergenciesGuidelineGuideline developmentMethodologyRapid reviews

Identifiers

PMID30005710
PMCPMC6044000

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.