Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37488555›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2023

The perceptions and experience of developing patient (version of) guidelines: a descriptive qualitative study with Chinese guideline developers.

Lijiao Yan, Jiale Hu, Zeyu Yu, Shelly-Anne Li, Karen Graham, Sarah E Scott, Chen Shen, Xuejing Jin, Jianping Liu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Perceptions and Attitudes of People With Cancer and Diabetes Towards Patient Guidelines: A Mixed Methods Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
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 at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Lijiao YanCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Jiale HuDepartment of Nurse Anesthesia, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VG, USA. jhu4@vcu.edu.
Zeyu YuCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Shelly-Anne LiLawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Karen GrahamHealthcare Improvement Scotland, Gyle Square 1 South Gyle Crescent, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Sarah E ScottNational Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Manchester, UK.
Chen ShenCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Xuejing JinCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Jianping LiuCentre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China. Liujp@bucm.edu.cn.
Beijing University of Chinese Medicine · CNHealthcare Improvement Scotland · GBNational Institute for Health and Care Excellence · GBUniversity of Toronto · CAVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81830115
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo understand developers' perception of patient (versions of) guidelines (PVGs), and identify challenges during the PVG development, with the aim to inform methodological guidance for future PVG development.

methodsWe used a descriptive qualitative design. Semi-structured interviews were conducted virtually from December 2021 to April 2022, with a purposive sampling of 12 PVG developers from nine teams in China. Conventional and directed content analysis was used for data analysis.

resultsThe interviews identified PVG developers' understanding of PVGs, their current practice experience, and the challenges of developing PVGs. Participants believed PVGs were a type of health education material for patients; therefore, it should be based on patient needs and be understandable and accessible. Participants suggested that PVGs could be translated/adapted from one or several clinical practice guidelines (CPG), or developed de novo (i.e., the creation of an entirely new PVG with its own set of research questions that are independent of existing CPGs). Participants perceived those existing methodological guidelines for PVG development might not provide clear instructions for PVGs developed from multiple CPGs and from de novo development. Challenges to PVG development include (1) a lack of standardized and native guidance on developing PVGs; (2) a lack of standardized guidance on patient engagement; (3) other challenges: no publicly known and trusted platform that could disseminate PVGs; concerns about the conflicting interests with health professionals. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our study suggests clarifying the concept of PVG is the primary task to develop PVGs and carry out related research. There is a need to make PVG developers realize the roles of PVGs, especially in helping decision-making, to maximize the effect of PVG. It is necessary to develop native consensus-based guidance considering developers' perspectives regarding PVGs.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelResearch DesignChinaHumansPatientsQualitative ResearchChinese mainlandClinical practice guidelinesGuideline developmentPatient engagementPatient involvementPatient version of guidelines

Identifiers

PMID37488555
PMCPMC10367247
OpenAlexW4385197381

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.