Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37311964›Full record

ReviewDer Nervenarzt2023

[Challenges and current approaches in the development of psychiatric living guidelines in Germany].

Andrea Pfennig, Bettina Soltmann, Steffi G Riedel-Heller, Uta Gühne, Frank Jessen, Michael Bauer, Jochen Schmitt

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Andrea PfennigKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Medizinische Fakultät Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland. andrea.pfennig@ukdd.de.
Bettina SoltmannKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Medizinische Fakultät Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland.
Steffi G Riedel-HellerInstitut für Sozialmedizin, Arbeitsmedizin und Public Health (ISAP), Medizinische Fakultät, Universität Leipzig, Leipzig, Deutschland.
Uta GühneInstitut für Sozialmedizin, Arbeitsmedizin und Public Health (ISAP), Medizinische Fakultät, Universität Leipzig, Leipzig, Deutschland.
Frank JessenKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Uniklinik Köln, Köln, Deutschland.
Michael BauerKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Medizinische Fakultät Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland.
Jochen SchmittZentrum für Evidenzbasierte Gesundheitsversorgung (ZEGV), Medizinische Fakultät Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Dresden, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Outdated guidelines can cause inadequate care. To counter this problem a dynamic updating process for guidelines is being internationally discussed (living guidelines). This process has specific challenges. The rhythm of updating has to be determined and a priori criteria have to be defined, which indicate that a substantial change of the medical practice is needed in order to then update individual recommendations. Digital tools have to be identified that can support a dynamic updating. Their (further) development has to be oriented to the specific requirements and needs of the trialogically composed guideline development teams. Recommendations have to be examined from the user perspective. The current guideline development methods that are still divergent, have to be harmonized and specific needs with respect to the cross-linking of guidelines have to be taken into account. The German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics (DGPPN) supports and accompanies scientific projects dealing with the challenges of the dynamics of guideline development. From the first results of "Guide2Guide", a project funded by the Innovation Fund, it can be summarized that the development of living guidelines is a complex dynamic process that has only just started internationally and in Germany. It demands a special engagement of the guideline developers including representatives of patients and relatives, to responsibly work long term and flexibly. Digital tools can be useful in various process steps but at present they still have to be meaningfully linked into the process. Central elements of the development of S3 guidelines will continue to require substantial working time of the experts in the trialogue. In order for living guidelines to be actually used dissemination and implementation have to be integrated into the dynamic process.

Indexed as

PsychiatryGermanyHumansPsychotherapyClinical guidelinesDigital toolsDynamic updatingUpdating guidelinesUser perspective

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.