Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36911345›Full record

ArticleCampbell systematic reviews2022

PROTOCOL: Barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development: A qualitative evidence synthesis.

Olivia Magwood, Alison Riddle, Jennifer Petkovic, Lyubov Lytvyn, Joanne Khabsa, Pearl Atwere, Elie A Akl, Pauline Campbell, Vivian Welch, Maureen Smith and 7 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Campbell systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. CORRIGENDUM.Campbell systematic reviews · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Olivia MagwoodC.T. Lamont Primary Health Care Research Centre Bruyere Research Institute Ottawa Canada.
Alison RiddleSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine University of Ottawa Ottawa Canada.
Jennifer PetkovicBruyère Research Institute University of Ottawa Ottawa Canada.
Lyubov LytvynDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics McMaster University Hamilton Canada.
Joanne KhabsaClinical Research Institute American University of Beirut Medical Center Beirut Lebanon.
Pearl AtwereBruyère Research Institute University of Ottawa Ottawa Canada.
Elie A AklDepartment of Internal Medicine American University of Beirut Medical Center Beirut Lebanon.
Pauline CampbellNursing, Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit Glasgow Caledonian University Glasgow UK.
Vivian WelchMethods Centre Bruyère Research Institute Ottawa Canada.
Maureen SmithCochrane Consumer Network Executive Cochrane Ottawa Canada.
Reem A MustafaDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics McMaster University Hamilton Canada.
Heather LimburgGlobal Health and Guidelines Division Public Health Agency of Canada Ottawa Canada.
Leonila F DansDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology University of the Philippines College of Medicine Manilla Philippines.
Nicole SkoetzCochrane Cancer, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne University of Cologne Cologne Germany.
Sean GrantDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health Indiana University Indianapolis Indiana USA.
Tom ConcannonThe RAND Corporation Boston Massachusetts USA.
Peter TugwellClinical Epidemiology Program Ottawa Hospital Research Institute Ottawa Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There is a need for the development of comprehensive, global, evidence-based guidance for stakeholder engagement in guideline development. Stakeholders are any individual or group who is responsible for or affected by health- and healthcare-related decisions. This includes patients, the public, providers of health care and policymakers for example. As part of the guidance development process, Multi-Stakeholder Engagement (MuSE) Consortium set out to conduct four concurrent systematic reviews to summarise the evidence on: (1) existing guidance for stakeholder engagement in guideline development, (2) barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in guideline development, (3) managing conflicts of interest in stakeholder engagement in guideline development and (4) measuring the impact of stakeholder engagement in guideline development. This protocol addresses the second systematic review in the series. Objectives: The objective of this review is to identify and synthesise the existing evidence on barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development. We will address this objective through two research questions: (1) What are the barriers to multi-stakeholder engagement in health guideline development across any of the 18 steps of the GIN-McMaster checklist? (2) What are the facilitators to multi-stakeholder engagement in health guideline development across any of the 18 steps of the GIN-McMaster checklist? Search Methods: A comprehensive search strategy will be developed and peer-reviewed in consultation with a medical librarian. We will search the following databases: MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE, PsycInfo, Scopus, and Sociological Abstracts. To identify grey literature, we will search the websites of agencies who actively engage stakeholder groups such as the AHRQ, Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR), INVOLVE, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the PCORI. We will also search the websites of guideline-producing agencies, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, Australia's National Health Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and the WHO. We will invite members of the team to suggest grey literature sources and we plan to broaden the search by soliciting suggestions via social media, such as Twitter. Selection Criteria: We will include empirical qualitative and mixed-method primary research studies which qualitatively report on the barriers or facilitators to stakeholder engagement in health guideline development. The population of interest is stakeholders in health guideline development. Building on previous work, we have identified 13 types of stakeholders whose input can enhance the relevance and uptake of guidelines: Patients, caregivers and patient advocates; Public; Providers of health care; Payers of health services; Payers of research; Policy makers; Program managers; Product makers; Purchasers; Principal investigators and their research teams; and Peer-review editors/publishers. Eligible studies must describe stakeholder engagement at any of the following steps of the GIN-McMaster Checklist for Guideline Development. Data Collection and Analysis: All identified citations from electronic databases will be imported into Covidence software for screening and selection. Documents identified through our grey literature search will be managed and screened using an Excel spreadsheet. A two-part study selection process will be used for all identified citations: (1) a title and abstract review and (2) full-text review. At each stage, teams of two review authors will independently assess all potential studies in duplicate using a priori inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data will be extracted by two review authors independently and in duplicate according to a standardised data extraction form. Main Results: The results of this review will be used to inform the development of guidance for multi-stakeholder engagement in guideline development and implementation. This guidance will be official GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Working Group guidance. The GRADE system is internationally recognised as a standard for guideline development. The findings of this review will assist organisations who develop healthcare, public health and health policy guidelines, such as the World Health Organization, to involve multiple stakeholders in the guideline development process to ensure the development of relevant, high quality and transparent guidelines.

Identifiers

PMID36911345
PMCPMC9038083

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.