ArticleJournal of clinical epidemiology2023
Weekly updating of guideline recommendations was feasible: the Australian National COVID-19 clinical evidence Taskforce.
Article in Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Priorities for Evidence-Based CKD Guidance Using Delphi Methods.Kidney international reports · 2026Article
- Evidence surveillance for a living clinical guideline: Case study of the Australian stroke guidelines.Health information and libraries journal · 2025Article
- Living methods for living guidelines: Changes to evidence synthesis methods in the Australian National Clinical Evidence Taskforce COVID-19 living guidelines.Clinical and public health guidelines · 2024Article
- Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Chinese Cardiovascular Guidelines and Evidence.JACC. Asia · 2024Article
- Designing, refining and reflecting on 3 years of daily evidence surveillance for Australia's living national COVID-19 guidelines.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2024Article
- Living evidence and adaptive policy: perfect partners?Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- Two Years of Experience and Methodology of Korean COVID-19 Living Clinical Practice Guideline Development.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate how quickly evidence was incorporated into the Australian living guidelines for COVID-19 during the first 12 months of the pandemic. STUDY DESIGN AND
settingFor each study concerning drug therapies included in the guideline from April 3, 2020 to April 1, 2021, we extracted the publication date of the study, and the guideline version the study was included in. We analyzed two subgroups of studies as follows: those published in high impact factor journals and those with 100 or more participants.
resultsIn the first year, we published 37 major versions of the guidelines, incorporating 129 studies that investigated 48 drug therapies informing 115 recommendations. The median time from first publication of a study to incorporation in the guideline was 27 days (interquartile range [IQR], 16 to 44), ranging from 9 to 234 days. For the 53 studies in the highest impact factor journals, the median was 20 days (IQR 15 to 30), and for the 71 studies with 100 or more participants the median was 22 days (IQR 15 to 36).
conclusionDeveloping and sustaining living guidelines where evidence is rapidly incorporated is a resource- and time-intensive undertaking; however, this study demonstrates that it is feasible, even over a long period.
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.